Angela Merkel calls for tougher EU privacy laws

German chancellor Angela Merkel has called for more stringent EU data protection rules, after allegations that US surveillance programmes have also impacted EU citizens. Sara Yasin reports

In an interview with ARD television yesterday, the German leader called for privacy rules that apply to all member states, as online companies are currently only required to follow legislation where they are registered. Facebook, for example, is registered in Ireland and is only required to follow Irish privacy laws.

Merkel also told ARD that she expects the United States to abide by Germany’s privacy laws in the future.

While Merkel has claimed that she learned of US mass surveillance from the media, German daily Bild reported that the country’s foreign intelligence agency (BND) knew about the programme as well as storage of German data for many years now. Bild also reported that data stored was also used by German intelligence to locate citizens kidnapped abroad.

Index, along with English PEN, Open Rights Group, and Article 19 have called on the European Parliament “to support a Data Protection Regulation that helps people regain control of their personal data.”

In a letter sent to Sarah Ludford MEP, a shadow rapporteur on the European Parliament’s data protection dossier, the organisations stressed the importance of control over personal data:

Too often, people do not know how their information will be used, where it will be processed or who will have access to it. This is partly because the principles of the current data protection laws are insufficiently implemented. We believe the new Data Protection Regulation could give people more control over what happens to their information, and ensure those that collect and use data adhere to the rules.

The European Parliament has ordered a probe into allegations that the United States has spied on EU citizens and diplomats. The Civil Liberties Committee will hold an inquiry, and plans to release a report by the end of this year.

Sara Yasin is an Editorial Assistant at Index. She tweets from @missyasin

Europe must take a stand on US surveillance

The revelations that the United States allegedly spied on European Union diplomats marks a low in what should be a special relationship of trust between major democracies. The EU needs to remind the US that surveillance is unacceptable in the digital age.

The row was prompted by revelations published by German magazine Der Spiegel on its website this past Saturday. Relying on documents allegedly leaked by the former NSA-contractor Edward Snowden, the magazine said the NSA had surveilled EU, French, German and Italian diplomatic offices in Washington and at the UN.

Instead of reminding US authorities of the EU belief in an open and free internet, Catherine Ashton, the high representative of the EU for foreign affairs and security policy, focused on the specific press reports, calling them a “matter for concern”. The European Union needs to reiterate its well-established position that “global connectivity should not be accompanied by censorship or mass surveillance.”

But French president Francois Hollande demanded the US stop its activities “immediately.” Later, the BBC reported that Hollande threatened to derail US-EU trade pact negotiations over the bugging scandal.

Germany’s government summoned the US ambassador to explain his country’s actions. Steffen Seibert, spokeperson for Chancellor Merkel, said that Germany wants “trust restored. We will clearly say that bugging friends is unacceptable.”

French foreign minister Laurent Fabius demanded an explanation “as soon as possible” after labelling the alleged spying unacceptable.

Martin Schulz, president of the EU Parliament warned that the allegations, if true, would have a “severe impact on the relations between the EU and the US. He demanded a fuller account of the Der Spiegel reports.

Thomas Drake, a former NSA employee turned whistleblower, who was prosecuted under the US espionage act tweeted today that the alleged spying had “little to do with classic eavesdropping. Instead, it’s closer to a complete structural acquisition of data”.

Index CEO Kirsty Hughes said:

“As disagreement grows between the EU and the US over surveillance, Index on Censorship calls for the EU to take a lead in condemning mass surveillance – which the EU’s cyberstrategy already warns against. We are also calling on the US government to acknowledge that the mass surveillance of citizens’ private communications is unacceptable and a threat to both privacy and freedom of expression.”

Germany stalls Turkey EU talks over unrest

 

ilip Janek | Demotix

Turkish PM Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Prague earlier this year

Germany has reportedly blocked Turkey’s next steps towards European Union membership yesterday, as unrest continues in the cities of Ankara and Istanbul.

The protests, which began on 28 May, have been met with force from Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan — and Germany has been critical of the crackdown on demonstrators. There have been 5,000 injuries as well as four deaths since the start of unrest.

Talks furthering Turkey’s case for membership were scheduled in its capital, Ankara, next week. Moving forward with the process would have required unanimous agreement from the European Union’s 27 member nations at a meeting in Brussels yesterday.

Diplomats representing Germany blocked the decision because of remaining “open questions.” According to an EU diplomat the protests “obviously had an impact on the decision.”

Turkey has fired back at Germany’s decision, warning that it would cool its relations with the European Union, and “draw a strong reaction.”

Sara Yasin is an Editorial Assistant at Index. She tweets from @missyasin

 

Is Twitter to blame for Nazi ban?

Twitter this week announced that it had blocked the account of German far-right group Besseres Hannover.

The small anti-immigrant group is accused of inciting racism and Neo-Nazism, and has been banned under Germany’s strict anti-Nazi laws.

A letter from Hanover police informed Twitter of this ban, and requested that they block the site: the platform complied, and since 25 September, the account has been unavailable.

It’s important to note the “in Germany” part. Besseres Hanover’s twitter account is still available in the rest of the world, though until today it had not been updated since the ban.

Back in January, Twitter announced that it would be introducing a system where it would comply with national blocking orders while keeping content available outside the relevant jurisdiction.

Interestingly, the blog post announcing this policy specifically mentioned Germany’s anti-Nazi laws:

As we continue to grow internationally, we will enter countries that have different ideas about the contours of freedom of expression. Some differ so much from our ideas that we will not be able to exist there. Others are similar but, for historical or cultural reasons, restrict certain types of content, such as France or Germany, which ban pro-Nazi content.

Until now, the only way we could take account of those countries’ limits was to remove content globally. Starting today, we give ourselves the ability to reactively withhold content from users in a specific country — while keeping it available in the rest of the world. We have also built in a way to communicate transparently to users when content is withheld, and why.

The reaction to this announcement was mixed: some initially screamed “CENSORSHIP!”, but probably the fairest analysis came from EFF’s Jillian C York, who wrote:

 Let’s be clear: This is censorship. There’s no way around that. But alas, Twitter is not above the law.  Just about every company hosting user-generated content has, at one point or another, gotten an order or government request to take down content. Google lays out its orders in its Transparency Report. Other companies are less forthright. In any case, Twitter has two options in the event of a request: Fail to comply, and risk being blocked by the government in question, or comply (read: censor).

… I understand why people are angry, but this does not, in my view, represent a sea change in Twitter’s policies. Twitter has previously taken down content — for DMCA requests, at least — and will no doubt continue to face requests in the future.  I believe that the company is doing its best in a tough situation… and I’ll be the first to raise hell if they screw up.


It’s a realistic view, and I’d be very surprised if Jillian raised hell about today’s case. Twitter is a private company, and while it has a decent record on free speech, it cannot be expected to go to the barricades for every issue. Moreover, Germany is a huge and wealthy market.

Twitter has complied with the law, and been open about it. The German law itself is the problem. Banning far-right views and Nazi-inspired historical revisionism is anachronistic for a modern liberal democracy. And these laws are pointed to as an example when the EU attempts to lecture the world on free speech.

In this case, Germany is censoring a tiny organisation whose main spokesman is a man in a furry outfit called Abschiebär, who appears in videos making Hitler salutes and mocking kebab shop workers. Interestingly, Abschiebär’s videos are still available on YouTube.

Nonetheless, it’s worth keeping an eye on this development: In our enthusiasm for social media, we often forget that we are communicating on platforms run by private companies. In order to function, private companies must obey the law of the land. The privatisation of social space is going to be a crucial factor in free speech debates.