Four places where social media could land you in jail

11 Jan 14 | Burma, China, Digital Freedom, Gambia, News and features

(Photo illustration: Shutterstock)

(Photo illustration: Shutterstock)

Facebook has nearly 1.2 billion monthly active users –that’s nearly 20% of the total global population. Yet, in some countries harsh sanctions and time in jail can be imposed on those who comment on social media, in the majority of cases for speaking out against their government.

China

China is infamous for its stance on censorship but September 2013 saw the introduction of perhaps one of their more bizarre laws: post a message online that the government deems defamatory or false and if it receives more than 500 retweets (or shares) or 5,000 views and the person responsible for the post could receive up to three years in jail.

For the post to be of concern to the government it must meet certain criteria before a conviction can occur. This includes causing a mass incident, disturbing public order, inciting ethnic and religious conflicts, and damaging the state’s image. And to top that off the post could also be a “serious case” of spreading rumours or false information online.

According to the Guardian one Weibo user, China’s largest microblogging site, wrote: “”It’s far too easy for something to be reposted 500 times or get 5,000 views. Who is going to dare say anything now?” whilst another claimed: “This interpretation is against the constitution and is robbing people of their freedom of speech”.

Vietnam

Decree 72 came into effect in Vietnam this year, a piece of legislation which makes it a criminal offence to share news articles or information gathered from government sites over online blogs and social media sites. The new law was criticised globally when it was announced in September as the latest attack on free expression in Vietnam adds to the list of censorship tactics already in place in the country; websites covering religion, human rights and politics have been blocked along with social media networks and some instant messaging services.

There are also fears that Decree 72 will risk harming international relations, with a direct impact on Vietnam’s economy, as well as internal restraints on the development of local businesses. Marie Harf, Deputy Spokesperson for the U.S. Department of State, said in a press statement: “An open and free Internet is a necessity for a fully functioning modern economy; regulations such as Decree 72 that limit openness and freedom deprive innovators and businesses of the full set of tools required to compete in today’s global economy.”

Burma

Going to jail merely for receiving an email would seem absurd to much of the world. In Burma this is written into law.The Electronic Transactions Law 2004 allows imprisonment of up to 15 years for “acts by using electronic transactions technology” deemed “detrimental to the security of the State or prevalence of law and order or community peace and tranquillity or national solidarity or national economy or national culture”. Put into layman’s terms that could mean a hefty jail sentence for being on the receiving end of an email the government isn’t so fond of.

Despite talks to remove the lengthy jail terms many feel the changes don’t do enough to tackle a problem with censorship the country has faced for several decades.

Gambia

Those who intend to critics the Gambian government online should only do so if they have a stack of money to spare, $82,000 to be precise, or be willing to spend 15 years in jail. Under the recently passed Information and Communication (Amendment) Act anyone accused of spreading “false news” about the government or public officials online will face these heavy sanctions. Other ways in which Gambians can find themselves behind bars includes producing caricatures or making derogatory statements against public officials online, inciting dissatisfaction via internet posts or instigating violence against the government online.

Article 19 condemned the Act, criticising it for being “a flagrant breach of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), as well as the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR), both of which Gambia is a party to”.

This article was posted on 11 Jan 2014 at indexoncensorship.org

Gambia: Newspaper website blocked

09 Jun 10 | Digital Freedom, Index Index, minipost

Editors of the US-based newspaper Gambia Echo have seen access to their website from within Gambia blocked by the country’s government. In a letter sent to the US State Department on June 4, the imprint’s editor-in-chief claims the move is part of a trend under President Yahya Jammeh towards restricting press freedom. Gambia Echo’s website, and that of Freedom Newspaper, another independent imprint, were previously blocked in 2008.

Gambian political figure jailed for ‘unlawful assembly’

14 Apr 10 | Index Index, minipost, Uncategorized

A prominent member of Gambia’s main opposition party has been sentenced to a year of hard labour on charges of “unlawful assembly”. The Media Foundation for West Africa suggested that the imprisonment of Femi Peters, campaign manager for the United Democratic Party, was an attempt by the government to weaken the opposition ahead of next year’s election. Peters vehemently denied the charges, which followed a meeting organised by the defendant without the approval of the country’s inspector general. Meanwhile, an exiled Gambian journalist claims he received death threats last week from the African country’s feared National Intelligence Agency. Yusupha Cham says he was threatened by the presidential security agency after criticising President Yahya Jammeh in a series of articles on Gambian news websites.

Gambian journalists censored after arrests

30 Mar 10 | Index Index, minipost, Uncategorized

Two journalists have been arrested by military officials in The Gambia while on an editorial assignment at a tourist site. Media Foundation for West Africa revealed that Sanna Camara and Saikou Jammeh of the Banjul-based Daily News were detained by the Tourism Security Unit last week. Authorities questioned them for two hours for taking photographs without authorisation. They were both later released after signing an agreement not to write any negative stories about their visit. Last year, Reporters Without Borders, said that attacks on press freedoms in Gambia are the worst in West Africa.