The Human Rights Council discusses internet freedom and censorship. It recognizes the right to freedom of expression online, but also the needs of countries to address threats to national security. It emphasizes threats can include conspiracies or content promoting violence, discrimination, while also taking cultural differences into account. The Council suggests adding an Internet Freedom Index to reviews and reaffirms the need to inform the public of censorship. It encourages establishing a UN Internet Task Force to deal with online corruption and regulate censorship while respecting sovereignty and culture. The Task Force would have headquarters in Zurich and govern censorship with 1/3 government, citizen, and journalist representatives.
Journalism in jordan: Developments in press freedom since the Arab SpringMatt J. Duffy
Research shows four major incidents in Jordan that led to worse press freedom rankings. They are criminal defamation charges, unfair protection of public figures, licensing of journalists and vague terrorism laws.
Overview of our GNI report, downloadable from http://globalnetworkinitiative.org/news/new-report-outlines-recommendations-governments-companies-and-others-how-protect-free
Journalism in jordan: Developments in press freedom since the Arab SpringMatt J. Duffy
Research shows four major incidents in Jordan that led to worse press freedom rankings. They are criminal defamation charges, unfair protection of public figures, licensing of journalists and vague terrorism laws.
Overview of our GNI report, downloadable from http://globalnetworkinitiative.org/news/new-report-outlines-recommendations-governments-companies-and-others-how-protect-free
Presentation by Christian D'Cunha at the 2019 CMPF Summer School for Journalists and Media Practitioners - Covering Political Campaigns in the Age of Data, Algorithms & Artificial Intelligence
This paper identifies and analyzes the defamation provisions in the laws of six Arab countries and compares them to generally accepted approaches toward libel and slander. The authors identify three main characteristics related to defamation law that are generally adopted by countries with strong protections for press freedom. First, public figures must withstand greater scrutiny than private figures so that powerful officials cannot use defamation charges to stifle public debate. Second, truth must be an absolute defense against allegations of defamation so that people cannot protect a good reputation that they do not deserve. Third, defamation cases should be handled by civil lawsuits rather than police complaints so that journalists are not unduly swayed in their reporting by the specter of ending up in prison. The analysis examines the penal codes, media laws and cybercrime laws of these six countries: Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, and the United Arab Emirates. The results find that the defamation provisions in these countries were nearly identical and that all were out of alignment with generally accepted norms. Public officials receive more protection than private figures, truth is not an absolute defense and all defamation charges are handled as criminal complaints. Also, the analysis found that most of the defamation provisions—which severely limit the ability of the press to function—are found in the penal codes, not the media laws. Therefore, any reform of media systems must address the penal codes.
Digital security law security of individual or governmentM S Siddiqui
The subject again seems complicated further complicate as cyber security is often conflated with cybercrime, or confused with related but distinct concepts such as cyber-resilience, cyber-warfare and cyber-defense. However, it is taken to mean the protection of digital information systems against attack, either by states or individual hackers.
The proposed law apparently drafted to protect the national interest from possible acts of citizens. It has mixed up the security of individual and nation.
Media freedom, media laws & ethics first amendment slander/libel & invasion of privacy copyrights & intellectual ownership federal communication commission technical/infrastructure web etiquette or netiquette
Comparison between media system of USA and PakistanZaibunnisa73
The ppt is about the comparison of media laws and system between United states of America and Pakistan.
Key points are:
Press Laws
Media Regulations
Press Freedom
Normative Model
Three-Layer Model for the Control of Online Content: A Study on ThailandArthit Suriyawongkul
Points of control, at Content level, Platform level, and Network level. - The deeper layer the control digging down, the more collateral damage, the more unrelated people got affected.
To censor something, the content needed to be known first. In online/electronic communication context, freedom of expression and privacy cannot be considered separately.
Presented on 17 July 2017 at 13th International Conference on Thai Studies, Chiang Mai. / Arthit Suriyawongkul, Foundation for Internet and Civic Culture
Presentation by Christian D'Cunha at the 2019 CMPF Summer School for Journalists and Media Practitioners - Covering Political Campaigns in the Age of Data, Algorithms & Artificial Intelligence
This paper identifies and analyzes the defamation provisions in the laws of six Arab countries and compares them to generally accepted approaches toward libel and slander. The authors identify three main characteristics related to defamation law that are generally adopted by countries with strong protections for press freedom. First, public figures must withstand greater scrutiny than private figures so that powerful officials cannot use defamation charges to stifle public debate. Second, truth must be an absolute defense against allegations of defamation so that people cannot protect a good reputation that they do not deserve. Third, defamation cases should be handled by civil lawsuits rather than police complaints so that journalists are not unduly swayed in their reporting by the specter of ending up in prison. The analysis examines the penal codes, media laws and cybercrime laws of these six countries: Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, and the United Arab Emirates. The results find that the defamation provisions in these countries were nearly identical and that all were out of alignment with generally accepted norms. Public officials receive more protection than private figures, truth is not an absolute defense and all defamation charges are handled as criminal complaints. Also, the analysis found that most of the defamation provisions—which severely limit the ability of the press to function—are found in the penal codes, not the media laws. Therefore, any reform of media systems must address the penal codes.
Digital security law security of individual or governmentM S Siddiqui
The subject again seems complicated further complicate as cyber security is often conflated with cybercrime, or confused with related but distinct concepts such as cyber-resilience, cyber-warfare and cyber-defense. However, it is taken to mean the protection of digital information systems against attack, either by states or individual hackers.
The proposed law apparently drafted to protect the national interest from possible acts of citizens. It has mixed up the security of individual and nation.
Media freedom, media laws & ethics first amendment slander/libel & invasion of privacy copyrights & intellectual ownership federal communication commission technical/infrastructure web etiquette or netiquette
Comparison between media system of USA and PakistanZaibunnisa73
The ppt is about the comparison of media laws and system between United states of America and Pakistan.
Key points are:
Press Laws
Media Regulations
Press Freedom
Normative Model
Three-Layer Model for the Control of Online Content: A Study on ThailandArthit Suriyawongkul
Points of control, at Content level, Platform level, and Network level. - The deeper layer the control digging down, the more collateral damage, the more unrelated people got affected.
To censor something, the content needed to be known first. In online/electronic communication context, freedom of expression and privacy cannot be considered separately.
Presented on 17 July 2017 at 13th International Conference on Thai Studies, Chiang Mai. / Arthit Suriyawongkul, Foundation for Internet and Civic Culture
UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE.pptxAnjana S Kumar
The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment / Torture Convention / UNCAT
It is an international human rights treaty, under the review of the United Nations. Adopted on 10 Dec 1984
PURPOSE OF THE CONVENTION
To prevent and eradicate the use of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and to ensure accountability for acts of torture.
It has same structure as UDHR, ICCPR and ICESCR with a preamble and 33 articles divided into 3 parts
THE COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE
It is the treaty body created to monitor and encourage States to uphold and implement their international obligations under the Convention against Torture.
CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE INITIATIVE
An inter-governmental initiative to strengthen institutions, policies and practices and reduce the risks of torture and ill-treatment by applying the UN Convention against Torture.
NHRC Handbook in English
Published by Human Rights Law Network(HRLN), a division of Socio Legal Information Centre(SLIC). For more details about our works, visit us at http://hrln.org
Internet rights are the rights that individuals have using the Internet.
They are an extension of human rights in the online world.
These rights include freedom of expression, privacy, access to information, and non-discrimination.
An Overview of the Battle for the Control of the InternetDibussi Tande
Presentation to a joint/plenary session of the 16th Highway Africa Conference and the 3rd World Conference of the Global Forum for Media Development (GFMD) in Grahamstown, South Africa, September 10, 2012.
INTRODUCTION
In the absence of an elected parliament that expresses the people and their concerns. In light of the growing awesome network of exceptional laws, which violating the Egyptian constitution of 2014 and the Egyptian successive Constitutions and violating of all international conventions signed by the Egyptian government, is getting the brunt of these laws that the Egyptian citizen burned.
In the light of this legislative vacuum there are many laws that restricted of the rights and freedoms of citizens, until it be more than 800 law and decision issued by individual decision from the president.
The important question is whether the country and its citizens really need this vast amounting of restricted law for freedom of its people and shackled the progress of society.
Does the law on terrorism and the law terrorist entities are able to stop this intellectual extremism creeping armed US?
Does Egypt need to have issue laws or it need to coherence of the Community intellectually and politically to stand in front of this wave of abnormal thought?
Can the Egypt deter a criminal by the laws or the government creates more extremists who find in violating of their rights field to force this country and continue to face?
Egypt is in dire need of wise now to take it towards the right path away from the fossilized minds or extremist ideas.
Therefore, we need to stop in front of these violations that Egypt was suffering in the human right's file in an unprecedented way in all the previous eras. The current power desires liquidation of all its opponents inside and outside prisons in the light of continued killings and torture.
We need to stop for a cessation of all manifestations of Industry extremism. We seek to build a nation afford all his sons. Egypt will not progressing by the cuffed law that was fallen what is remain of Egypt institutions which created a new tyrants by the law!
METHODOLOGY OF THE REPORT
These reports methodology has adopted to collect information, through direct monitoring to researchers of ECRF for the cases and asked all the associated of the incident under discussion. In this report we have adopted on all investigations and press releases that have been issued over the past months, as well as asked lawyers, experts and jurists.
1. Council:Topic:Human Rights CouncilInternet Freedom and Censorship Date: March 17th 2010HRC/Res/A/1Sponsors:Italy, France, UK, US, Ukraine, Netherlands, Japan, Qatar, ChinaCo-Sponsors:Jordan, Philippines, Mexico, Pakistan, Nigeria, Egypt<br />Recalling the principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights affirming faith in fundamental human rights and the dignity and worth of the human person,<br />Affirming the faith in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights pertaining to the right of freedom of speech and expression,<br />Taking into consideration the needs of United Nations Human Rights Council member states to address issues threatening their national security,<br />Recognizing the importance of freedom of expression with regards to the universal promotion of growth, development and knowledge,<br />Encouraging the role of international institutions and Non Governmental Organizations working towards the elimination of human rights violations,<br />Respecting the right of every individual to freely access the Internet, <br />Emphasizing the importance of filtering content that poses a direct threat to national and/or international security <br />Taking into consideration the cultural differences between nations with regards to the varying levels of filtering,<br />The Human Rights Council:<br />Emphasizes that threats include but are not limited to conspiracies, supporting violence and promoting discrimination based on religion, culture, race or sex;<br />Recalls upon the Universal Periodic Review, and suggests the addition of the Internet Freedom Index which assesses the level of internet freedom and censorship in the country under review;<br />Reaffirms the need to inform the public when online data and information is censored or monitored;<br />There must be a list of websites that are monitored which should be released to the public;<br />Users should be notified if search results have been altered;<br />Encourages the establishment of a neutral advisory United Nations Internet Task Force that deals with diminishing corruption online through internet activism and will;<br />Be composed of internet experts and veteran journalists;<br />Have a permanent headquarters in Zurich, Switzerland and will not have any permanent presence in any other country;<br />Pay attention to the sovereignty of each state that it operates in while enforcing moderate regulations concerning Internet access and censorship;<br />Take into account culturally sensitive matters;<br />Request that upon the desire to censor, the specific government submit a form to UN task force justifying legitimate reasons behind what and why they want to censor;<br />Ensures that voting on any issue that concerns Internet censorship will be conducted by one third being government representatives, one third being locally elected citizens and one third being international correspondents;<br />Be always available for consultation without the need to be physically present at the location of the dispute, in the case that it is unable to respond to any request put forward by a particular government to censor within forty eight hours, the local government is entitled to take temporary action on its own;<br />Urges all Internet Content Providers to comply with the rules and regulations set forth by the United Nations Internet Task Force;<br />Advocates that all individuals being prosecuted for Internet violations receive a fair and public trial in accordance with the laws of the nation where they were accused.<br />Enforces that no individual government can own more than two thirds of Internet Service Providers in that country;<br />Condemns any form of illegal online activity including but not limited to child pornography, illegal online gambling, medical drugs without prescriptions, is subject to censorship;<br />Reaffirms that individuals are subject to prosecution if their online activities directly instigate any form of violence, hate or discrimination in all its forms; <br />Reminds all states that anything that presents a threat to state security is subject to censorship;<br />