[ad_1]
Western technology companies have long had a complex relationship with dictatorships and countries where respect for human rights is insufficient. Recently, Google exploded for its project to create a new search engine for the Chinese market, subject to Chinese censorship and also linking the searches and the phone number of the user.
In the EU, this has been going on for several years a review of the export rules for this technology. The aim was to prevent dictatorships from using products developed by the EU to fight human rights violations. The negotiations are complicated by the fact that this technology has a dual purpose: the same products used to chase criminals can also contribute to the persecution of oppressive states by the opposition and journalists.
It's about surveillance tools, spyware and technologies for own data scams.
Sweden and Finland are now designated to try to block strict regulations, as other countries have been working for a long time. This week, the German Reporters Without Borders department published negotiating documents that show Sweden has opposed several attempts to tighten regulation.
"Sweden and Finland are the most powerful opponents to the improvement of human rights in this case, and I could hardly believe it when I read the documents," said Daniel Mossbrucker, a senior advisor. the police for digital issues on Reporters Without Borders in Germany, following the leak.
Charges are saved several organizations, including Amnesty and the German organization Netzpolitik.org.
In a leaked document dated January this year, Sweden claims, for example, that the regulation would risk hitting companies in the European Union and make their competition more difficult. "There is no shortage of non-European suppliers in countries that demand cyber-surveillance technology," he writes. "The control of EU exports without corresponding measures in other major economies would only shift the development and product of the relevant technology to countries outside the EU."
Critics suspect this attitude of being the result of lobbying Nordic companies developing internet technologies and telecommunications. Their export business could be complicated by new rules.
– Some EU Member States give priority to the interests of the industry in the protection of human rights defenders. They want to give companies the opportunity to sell products that can intercept communications and track shippers in countries that violate human rights, "Nele Meyer told Amnesty International. International in a statement.
A battle question is what technique which will be governed by the regulations. Sweden is exploiting the line that the EU will rely on the list of regulated technologies already covered by international conventions. According to Daniel Mossbrucker, this is far from sufficient, pointing out that, for example, Internet monitoring centers are not covered and can therefore be sold without hindrance.
– The communication of millions of people can be monitored. This is unacceptable. The Court of Justice of the European Communities has stated that this violates human rights, but we have no problem in exporting it. We are talking about countries like China, Egypt, Morocco and Syria, he said.
DN solicited comments from Justice Minister Morgan Johansson and EU Minister Ann Linde, but without result. Annika Ben David, Swedish ambassador for human rights, reacted in early October to the criticism of a letter addressed to organizations. She writes that Sweden supports the intention to put an end to the human rights violations that repressive regimes can commit by means of digital surveillance equipment. At the same time, she opposes the proposals. If the EU creates its own lists of surveillance equipment that will be exported, it risks eroding other international agreements, she writes. The letter also warns of rules that are "vague and subject to interpretation".
The issue of export regulation has not yet been decided. Later in November, the Austrian Presidency will present a compromise proposal, because if accepted by the Member States, negotiations between the European Parliament, the Commission and the Council of Ministers could be negotiated.
Controversial settlement
Negotiations on new export controls for digital surveillance equipment have been ongoing since 2016.
This development results in particular from the disclosure of information on the way in which the technology provided by European companies helps countries that are not respectful of human rights. An example is the Italian hacking team, which sells data protection tools. In 2015, leaked documents revealed that the company had countries such as Saudi Arabia, Russia and Uzbekistan on the list of its customers.
Source link
