Li com atenção o texto e sou favorável à assinatura. Prós: 1. de modo geral concordo com o texto, que pede fiscalização sobre surveillance sem demonizar ninguém. 2. se a gente não assinar isso, corre o risco de ficar irrelevante no debate
Contra: 3. citação da Dilma como baluarte da defesa de direitos individuais enfraquece e politiza o texto 4. não sei como ficou o texto final nosso, se incluimos ou não a questão da privacidade no nosso escopo. Esse abaixo-assinado inclui questões de transparência (nosso escopo e parte importante do abaixo-assinado) mas também de privacidade. ------------------------------------ We, the undersigned civil society organisations, affirm our deep commitment to the goals of the Open Government Partnership, which in its declaration endorsed “more transparent, accountable, responsive and effective government” founded on the principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. We join other civil society organisations, human rights groups, academics and ordinary citizens in expressing our grave concern over allegations that governments around the world, including many OGP members, have been routinely intercepting and retaining the private communications of entire populations, *in secret, without particularised warrants and with little or no meaningful oversight.* *CONCORDO* Such practices allegedly include the routine exchange of “foreign” surveillance data, bypassing domestic laws that restrict governments’ ability to spy on their own citizens. Such practices erode the checks and balances on which accountability depends, and have a deeply chilling effect on freedom of expression, information and association, without which the ideals of open government have no meaning. As Brazil’s President, Dilma Rousseff, recently said at the United Nations, “In the absence of the right to privacy, there can be no true freedom of expression and opinion, and therefore no effective democracy.” (HIPOCRISIA POIS ESSE GOVERNO NÃO TEM CUIDADO COM PRIVACIDADE) Activities that restrict the right to privacy, including communications surveillance, *can only be justified when they are prescribed by law, are necessary to achieve a legitimate aim, and are proportionate to the aim pursued.* *CONCORDO* [1] Without firm legislative and judicial checks on the surveillance powers of the executive branch, and robust protections for the media and public interest whistleblowers, abuses can and will occur. We call on all governments, and specifically OGP members, to: *recognise the need to update understandings of existing privacy and human rights law to reflect modern surveillance technologies and techniques.* *commit in their OGP Action Plans to complete by October 2014 a review of national laws, with the aim of defining reforms needed to regulate necessary, legitimate and proportional State involvement in communications surveillance; to guarantee freedom of the press; and to protect whistleblowers who lawfully reveal abuses of state power.* *commit in their OGP Action Plans to transparency on the mechanisms for surveillance, on exports of surveillance technologies, aid directed towards implementation of surveillance technologies, and agreements to share citizen data among states.* *CONCORDO* Abraço, Heloisa On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 9:58 PM, Carolina <[email protected]> wrote: > Talvez esse seja do escopo da OKF ? :-) > > Sent from my iPhone > > Begin forwarded message: > > *From:* Renata Avila <[email protected]> > *Date:* November 1, 2013 at 7:30:18 PM EDT > *To:* "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > *Subject:* *[gvadvocacy] Requesting your individual, institutional > signature and wondering if GV Advox could-should sign: Open Gov and > Surveillance* > *Reply-To:* Renata Avila <[email protected]> > > Dear all, > > I want to request your signature on a quite singular petition. The > last two days, both governments and civil society met in a summit to > discuss Open Government. The Platform is called The Open Government > Partnership, and, while there are many debatable issues in such > alliance, It is one of the few mechanisms with structured plans that > the governments must follow every year: the aim is to make the govs > more open, transparent and accountable. > > And during this annual meeting, the Surveillance Debate was the > elephant in the room, the center of all debates. This petition > basically asks govs to include the topic on their annual plans, which > will be an opportunity to revive the issue during all the periodical > evaluations and to push for concrete commitments from governments. > > While the drafting is far from perfect (It was written in a hurry) > your name on it - or your organization name on it, will really make it > stronger. And the request will be circulated among states. And please > note it also includes a plea for more transparency on surveillance > techs - the commercial ones. > > Here it is, including how you can join... > > > http://www.webfoundation.org/2013/11/statement-of-concern-on-disproportionate-surveillance/ > > Have a nice weekend! > > > _______________________________________________ > okfn-br mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-br > Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/okfn-br > >
_______________________________________________ okfn-br mailing list [email protected] http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-br Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/okfn-br
