Declaration29
Aus Freiheit statt Angst!
A group of members of European Parliament is collecting signatures for a Written Declaration that reads: "The European Parliament [...] Asks the Council and the Commission to implement Directive 2006/24/EC and extend it to search engines in order to tackle online child pornography and sex offending rapidly and effectively".
The Data Retention Directive 2006/24/EC requires that details on every telephone call, text message, e-mail and Internet connection be recorded for months, for the entire population, in the absence of any suspicion. As to what is wrong with data retention please refer to DRletter. The Written Declaration even wants to extend data retention to search engines, meaning that your search terms could be tracked for months back.
The proposed declaration has been signed by 371 MEPs (list of names here) - and thus reached the 368 members needed to pass it. Many MEPs signed because of the title of the document ("setting up a European early warning system (EWS) for paedophiles and sex offenders"), not knowing that they are endorsing blanket data retention as well. More than 30 MEPs decided to withdraw their signature, one even on the day of adoption.
Inhaltsverzeichnis |
Wikström mail
Sporting the subject line “Warning about written declaration on paedophiles (no 29)” Ms Wikström sent the text below to MEPs this afternoon (at 17:47, if you need to reference it when talking to MEPs):
Dear colleagues,
I would like to share my mistake with you in case some of you have made the same mistake.
When signing written declarations, sometimes one too quickly signs declarations that sound good. For example a written declaration on setting up a European early warning system (EWS) for paedophiles and sex offenders (no 29). I signed this declaration in an early stage but have now withdrawn my signature. Maybe some of you have done the same mistake?
The review of the Data Retention Directive is currently underway, with a report expected from the Commission in September. The Directive was adopted under the previous legislature after severe pressure from the Council and despite being repeatedly rejected by the Civil Liberties Committee.
Following such a difficult adoption in the European Parliament, implementation problems in Austria, Belgium, Germany, Greece, Romania and Sweden and in advance of the Commission’s report on implementation of the Directive, it is clearly inappropriate for the Parliament to take a position on this topic now.
The Written Declaration is supposed to be about an early-warning system for the protection of children. Long-term storage of citizens’ data has clearly nothing to do with “early warning” for any purpose. The “data preservation” system established by the Council of Europe Cybercrime Convention was designed specifically for cases requiring urgent preservation of data in relation to ongoing investigations.
Both of the two e-mails sent to MEPs focused on the early warning system and neither mentioned the data retention Directive. The website set up to support the written declaration also does not mention data retention, at least not in an obvious way. Even the written declaration itself does not mention the Directive by name, but only refers to its reference number.
Bearing in mind the fact that data retention is not relevant to an early-warning system and that none of the material made available to MEPs on the subject mentioned data retention, it seems very likely that MEPs signed the Written Declaration unaware of this aspect of the text, just like I did. I want to stress that while I support the principles of Written Declaration 29, the inclusion of a reference to the delicate and unrelated issue of data retention makes it impossible for me to support this written declaration. I therefore regret that I had to withdraw my signature. It is unfortunate both that this was included in the Declartion and that it was not mentioned in any of the communications from its sponsors. The declaration is likely to get all the signature it needs and therefore I urge those of you who may have signed it by mistake to withdraw your signature. In order to do this, please contact "Déclarations écrites" at 32975.
Sincerely,
Cecilia Wikström, MEP
Socialists and Democrats Group letter
It appears that the secretary general of the Socialists and Democrats Group in European Parliament has written to all the MEPs of that group to warn them about Written Declaration 29. Key points are:
- It explains that the Declaration would extend the DR Directive to cover search engines.
- Search engines are not a way in which abuse material is generally accessed, it goes through more "discrete" [sic] channels
- MEPs are asked not to sign or to withdraw if they have already signed.
- It points out that several Members from other democratic groups have already announced publically that they have been mislead and have withdrawn their signature.
Motti mail
The author of the declaration sent the following e-mail on 17 June to MEPs "clarifying" his proposed declaration:
To the Members of the European Parliament
Important: clarification on Written declaration 29
Dear Colleague,
Written Declaration 29 is receiving high consensus. Nevertheless, I would like to clarify one
paragraph of the text of the Written Declaration 29, related to "search engines".
Written declaration 29, still respecting citizen right to privacy, has the target of creating an
European Early Warning System in order to make paedophiles punishable when found
guilty of using the Internet to lure children and to upload sexual children related content;
Furthermore, this initiative calls the Council and the Commission to extend Directive
2006/24 CE, known as the "Data Detention Directive", to the internet users who upload
contents, images and videos portraying abuses on children in Internet platforms (such as
user generated contents websites).
There is no intention to extend this Directive to the same search engines for internet
users looking for any other kind of topic.
For the sake of avoiding technicalities, I have simply indicated in the text of the Declaration the wording "search engines", but it is in no way aiming or identifying the willingness of including "any research made through the search engines". On the contrary: the declaration has the only objective to persecute children related pornography and sexual harassment online. Again, not any research made through search engines.
Whereas Written Declaration is a not a legislative act, I wish that Written Declaration n.29 hits the target of being approved and may become simply a base of discussion in future in order to promote better protection of children rights still by guarantying every citizen right to privacy.
I will be more than happy to be at your full disposal for any further clarification and I thank you in advance for your appreciated and wide adhesion to this initiative.
Best regards
Tiziano Motti
Comment: This is contrary to the wording of the Declaration and wrong.
Pro declaration lobbying
The EP is cluttered with posters, flyers and pamphlets. Photos:
- http://u.nu/56kyb
- http://u.nu/27kyb (put on the table outside (every?) MEPs office)
- http://u.nu/47kyb
- http://u.nu/4uvxb
- http://u.nu/6uvxb
