The Tunisian Internet Agency was the Ben Ali regime’s instrument for censoring the web. Now, as it attempts to break ties with the past, Afef Abrougui talks to its CEO about the online challenges facing Tunisia
The regime of Zine El Abidine Ben Ali was an enemy to internet freedom. Significant resources were spent on censorship of the web. The Tunisian Internet Agency (established in 1996, and known as the ATI by its French acronym), was the regime’s instrument to block access to online dissident voices and websites that criticised the regime. After the ousting of Ben Ali on 14 January 2011, Tunisian netizens have started to enjoy unprecedented, uncensored web access.
And as the ATI is trying to break all ties with its image as a web censor, questions are being raised about the role of the agency in post-revolution Tunisia, the destiny of censorship machinery, and the challenges to the internet in the country.
To answer these questions and more, Index on Censorship interviewed Moez Chakchouk, the ATI’s CEO.
There is a complaint lodged against ATI to filter pornographic content on the web. If ATI loses the case, how do you see the future of internet censorship in Tunisia? Will this case pave the way for other lawsuits asking the ATI to block other content?
Currently, there are other lawsuits against the ATI requiring it to filter other content. There are lawsuits filed by investigating magistrates, similar to the complaint lodged by the military Tribunal in May. [In May, 2011, and following a verdict issued by the military tribunal, the ATI filtered five Facebook pages criticising the army]. We have received complaints to censor about 30 Facebook pages.
Who is lodging such complaints?
There are complaints lodged by one person against another one, for defamation, or for spreading false or unconfirmed information. In this case, an investigating magistrate has asked the agency to filter such content.
Under the former regime, ATI used to use censorship equipment. Questions are being raised about such equipment. Where is it now? What happened to it? Will it be ever used again?
The censorship equipment is still at the ATI headquarters. The machinery was bought by the government and installed at the ATI in 2006. In 2011, we did not buy anything new. The equipment requires an extension every year to face increase in Internet traffic. In 2011, we did not do anything; we could not buy more equipment because the government took back a subvention that was first allocated to the ATI.
What about the five Facebook pages that the Military tribunal asked you to filter in May?
We did filter those pages for some time but then we stopped for technical reasons.The global filters were not capable of covering all Internet traffic, which increased from 30 Gbits to 45 Gbits over last year. And for an increase of 15Gbits, we need two more filtering machines. When we tried to filter those pages with the available equipment, Internet service quality lowered. And we can’t allow this to happen because we have contracts with Internet Service Providers (ISPs) …We are somehow caught in between. Judicially, the agency is obliged to filter (…) but we could not do it. So we have decided not to filter until we could improve the equipment that we have.
Plus in August 2011 the agency faced another mechanical breakdown; the filtering machinery failed. And this is quite normal because over the past year no maintenance took place and we did not develop the equipment that we have.
Under the former regime, the ATI used to play the role of Internet censor. What is the role of the ATI in post-Ben Ali Tunisia? And how will it move from an agency that censors online dissident voices and content criticising the regime to an institution guaranteeing net freedom?
Right now there is no internet censorship. I’m against censorship. But in case there is a call for the comeback of censorship, it should be based on legal texts. And for the moment there are no such texts for the Internet in Tunisia.
The goal of the agency after the revolution is guaranteeing net neutrality. When we say net neutrality we should not care about the content.
Again we do not prefer Internet legislation because we are aware its risks.
If we want to develop the Internet in Tunisia we should not create obstacles. It is not urgent for Tunisia to draw red lines. This is my personal point of view independent of the agency, which has to remain neutral.
If there is to be Internet control in Tunisia, this control should be smart, transparent and for security reasons. The agency, used to carry out such control secretly. Today we are advocating absolute transparency. It would be better if a new public agency would be established and take charge of such a task. The ATI cannot guarantee internet neutrality and supervise the Internet at the same time. That is a conflict. This is my personal view as the legal representative of the ATI.
Do you know where the key technicians and officials who ran the old regime’s internet blocking and surveillance operation are? Are they still working?
The ATI is a technical agency where the censorship equipment was and is still installed. The agency has never been involved in deciding which websites should be censored. The employees of the agency know how to operate, and maintain the machinery; but they are not the ones who chose the websites to censor. They are only trained to maintain the equipment. Those who took such decisions were not ATI employees.
According to the information that I have; the Tunisian Agency for External Communication [known by its French acronym as the ATCE] was involved in taking such decisions (…) the ATCE had important transactions with the ATI. But these transactions were not documented as practices of censorship, but as website surveillance. But there is nothing documented that proves there were censorship related transactions between the two agencies.
The former ruling party, the Constitutional Democratic Party, (now dissolved, and known by its French acronym the as RCD) , the presidential palace and the security apparatus, might have been involved in such practices too. I don’t know exactly. There are no documents that reveal exact names and parties.
What about the foreign companies that the agency cooperated with under the former regime? Are you still cooperating with them?
We are no longer cooperating with the companies that the agency cooperated with in the past. Over the past year we put an end to the agency’s dealings with old markets, and we did not launch any new censorship-related projects.
Since the agency is filtering for public institutions, we have been trying to renew a maintenance contract with a filtering company. But we have faced enormous issues, and the contract has not been renewed yet. This company considered the Tunisian Internet agency a big partner … a technical partner that hosted equipment that does not belong to it, and that was used to undertake censorship and surveillance related tests. For these companies, Tunisia responded to their needs; a country close to Europe, and a place where everything was permitted, and no one dares to raise the question about the 404 error. But now, when a website hosted in Europe, or the USA does no longer exist, and 404 error appears on the computer screen, newspapers immediately report that “censorship is back” , and that “ATI is lying to us”. Truly, there is not a single functioning machine except the local filters, which are functioning for public institutions.
What is the name of this company?
Unfortunately, I can’t tell you the names of the companies. I read the contracts of these companies with the agency, and they contain confidentiality clauses.
What are the upcoming challenges for the ATI and for the internet in Tunisia?
When we check the ICT development index, we notice that the problem of Tunisia is the content. We have an advanced infrastructure but the content and apps are not developing for simple reasons. Before, to create a website there were obstacles — namely waiting for the ATCE approval, and censorship. People did not feel comfortable and safe to create content. It was impossible to create websites in Tunisia; it was a dream.
Obtaining a domain name for a website was impossible too. But, now any Tunisian citizen can go ask for the name of the domain that he or she chooses. There are no more political constraints. And there is no more censorship. People used to be afraid from authorities tracking them and their families down. This is why Tunisia was behind.
Obstacles that were established during a specific period should be abolished now. We should try to ensure an adequate development without constraints, and barriers. The internet is freedom, the internet is openness. Of course it can be badly used, but we will go through this over time.
Now, people are lodging complaints against each other for defamation. We are overreacting and I have fears that if we over react we will receive censorship orders.
Another challenge for the internet in Tunisia is regulation. The government should not be involved in internet regulation. Instead, an independent authority should take in charge such task. But we don’t have such authorities for the internet in Tunisia, so we have to raise this issue realistically.
If the state wants to draw red lines for net freedom, it should first establish an independent authority to regulate the internet. Internet legislation should not be drafted without a regulation authority that creates balance, between public and individual interests. The state has the right to protect and eliminate defamation, but citizens have the right to freely express themselves. So we need balance, and if the government cannot create such balance, a conflict of interests will occur.
Monday 23 January will be remembered as a grim day for freedom of expression in Tunisia.
In addition to the trial of Nabil Karoui, general director of Nessma TV, accused of “violating sacred values” and “disturbing the public order” for broadcasting the film Persepolis, journalists and activists standing in solidarity with the TV station were physically and verbally abused by ultraconservative Islamists.
Krichan was followed as he walked outside the court where the trial was taking place, insulted, and pushed by protesters. When his colleague Hamadi Redissi tried to defend him, he too was physically assaulted.
Krichan is the editor-in chief of the daily Le Maghreb, which describes itself as a newspaper “against all threats to the modern achievements of Tunisia”. The front-page of its 218th issue, published on 22 January included a photo of Karoui, with the headline “the wrong trial.”
Krichen said he lodged a complaint against those who assaulted him. In an interview with Le Maghreb, he expressed his “astonishment” at the passiveness of the Interior Ministry. ”The slogans that were raised, were raised against me as a journalist; the media is the target of these groups”, he said.
Prime Minister Hamadi Jebali condemned the “violation of the physical integrity of Mr. Krichen”, saying that an investigation will be opened, and that the attacker will be punished.
Liliah Weslati, who was also verbally and physically abused while she was protesting outside the court, described the Prime Minister’s intervention as “excellent”, but said she is looking forward to “concrete acts”.
“I don’t like Nessma TV, and I don’t watch it, but I protested for freedom of speech,” she told Index on Censorship.
Weslati held a banner that read “Even in the Quran Satan had the right to talk”. On two occasions, anti-Nessma protesters forcibly took away the banner from her. Other protesters told her to “go back home”. She was even threatened with death. Aymen Amri, Weslati’s colleague, was also attacked as he attempted to videotape the way she was mistreated. He was pushed over, and the camera fell to the ground.
Weslati told Index:
There is a campaign against me on Facebook (…) they are calling me the ‘Devil’s friend’ (…) once I arrived home I changed the jacket I was wearing outside the court, I was afraid they would recognise me.
With the fall of the former ruler Zeine El Abdine Ben Ali, journalists and activists started to breathe. The numbers of police assaults on journalists fell and activists have enjoyed rights and freedoms they never had before: the right to assemble, protest and to criticise.
This kind of brutality, in the name of the religion endangers these new freedoms. In order to avoid establishing a pattern of abuse, in which such assaults are repeated over and over, the Tunisian authorities and the judiciary must act now to bring such extremists to justice.
A Tunis court today delayed issuing a verdict on Nabil Karoui, general director of Nessma TV, a privately-owned television station, and two of his employees, until 19 April. The three are accused of “violating sacred values” and “disturbing the public order,” for airing the French-Iranian film, Persepolis.
The broadcast of Persepolis, which contains a scene where god is depicted as a white-bearded man, sparked a wave of protests in October. The home of Karoui, as well as the headquarters of Nessma TV were attacked following the broadcast. Depictions of god and religious figures are prohibited in Sunni Islam. If convicted, Karoui could face up to three years in prison. “This is a trial of freedom of expression”, he said as he entered court today.
A few dozen protesters from the extreme right gathered outside the court chanting “Karoui, you coward, the religion of Allah should not be humiliated,” and “the people want the fall of the TV station.”
Employees of Nessma, activists, politicians, artists, and citizens also gathered outside the hearing room, to show their support to the TV station in particular, and defend freedom of speech, in general.
Mrs Kadour, a university teacher, described the trial as being “shameful… political and exaggerated” and said that it was unacceptable “to judge people for their ideas.”
Mounira Laajimi, one of the 144 lawyers that filed complaints against the station, deemed the “timing” of the film’s broadcast as “inappropriate,” as it was shown a few weeks before the 2011 elections. “It caused public disorder just before the elections” she added.
On 20 January, Amnesty International demanded that Tunisian authorities drop the charges against Karoui. “Putting Nabil Karoui on trial simply for screening a film which shows fantasy scenes of God is a very troubling development,” said Philip Luther, Amnesty International’s interim Director for Middle East and North Africa.
“The Tunisian authorities must uphold Nabil Karoui’s right to freedom of expression and drop these charges immediately,” he added. The trial is closely watched by free speech advocates, as it is going to indicate to which extent religion imposes restrictions on freedom of speech, in post revolution Tunisia.
