On December 11 of this year, Reporters Without Borders and Human Rights Watch jointly released a press release calling for the EU to enact new controls on internet censorship and surveillance technologies that are regularly being built in Europe and shipped to authoritarian states all over the world
. Cynthia Wong, a senior researcher on the internet and human rights at Human Rights Watch, said:
It is irresponsible and even negligent for companies to market powerful surveillance technologies to abusive governments without considering the human rights impact or whether it is even appropriate to provide those goods and services. European governments shouldn’t just leave these decisions to the private sector. They need to act to regulate the trade in these technologies.
The EU has already blocked the export of surveillance technology to Syria and Iran, but a step further to ban the export of all types of censorship and surveillance technology would be seen by many as a vital blow to authoritarianism and a step forward for free speech.
The press release has come just days before the collapse of the WCIT over fundamental differences between the nations regarding internet regulation. With the US, the UK, much of Europe and some key African nations all having refused to sign
the new global telecoms treaty, it seems that the internet will remain as it is for now. Unfortunately, however, for people of many nations censorship and surveillance are the norm. With much of the technology that makes this possible originating in Europe, it does seem that the EU could do more to prevent human rights abuses in the form of internet censorship and surveillance.
Other than these more sophisticated surveillance technologies, which violate human rights, most basic censorship is done by the ISPs of various nations, and done with legitimate Western software such as SmartFilter. This is the same type of software that can be purchased by schools, offices, and parents to prevent users accessing unsuitable material such as pornography or gambling sites. Users simply have to choose from among 91 categories of sites they wish to censor, and the filter will do the rest for them. The OpenNet Initiative, an organisation that exists to expose internet filtering, censorship, and surveillance all over the world, have found signs of these Western filtering specialists’ activity all over the Middle East and China. This is uniformly denied, however, with Secure Computing (who are now owned by McAfee), producers of SmartFilter, having gone so far as to accuse Iran of having obtained their software illegally.
Despite their vehement public support of internet freedom and free speech, Western nations are perhaps not the advocates of liberal internet access and human rights they would have us believe. Let’s not forget Google’s transparency report, which let us know that many of the requests they receive to censor information come from precisely these supposed advocates of an ‘open’ internet. It seems that Western societies are happy to outwardly condemn the processes of overt surveillance and censorship used by nations such as Iran, China, and Russia, while using these same processes themselves when they deem it necessary, and at the same time providing the technology that makes them possible.
Preventing the export of such tools from the EU would by no means prevent internet censorship or surveillance. There are undoubtedly many local experts who would be happy to take on the job (or US companies to step in and fill the void). It would be an important gesture, however, making it clear that the EU is not willing to facilitate processes that violate human rights. It may only be a small step forward, but it would be a step forward nonetheless for freedom of expression and human rights.