- See a drone? ‘Shoot it down,’ says Colorado ordinance
- Spanish journalists kidnapped by al Qaeda group in Syria
- Nevada rescuers frenzied to find 4 kids, 2 adults lost in snow
- ‘TipsforJesus’ strikes in New York, with three massive tips
- John Podesta jumps aboard Obama ship to sell second-term agenda
- ‘Tis the Season: London florist creates $4.6 million Christmas wreath
- No tailgating allowed at Super Bowl XLVIII
- Pentagon to transport African troops to Central African Republic
- Chinese man fed up with his girlfriend’s shopping jumps to his death
- Ukraine leader to talk with protesters; Washington urges caution
Revised Internet treaty could help stifle dissent
Internet engineers and legal scholars are worried that amendments to a U.N. telecommunications treaty will give repressive governments more control of the Internet in their countries and could begin to undermine international sanctions against pariah states such as Iran.
Current and former U.S. and foreign officials, scientists and scholars will testify about their concerns Tuesday before a joint hearing of the House Foreign Affairs and the House Energy and Commerce committees.
According to prepared testimony and other documents made available by the House Energy and Commerce Committee, the witnesses will report on the outcome of December’s World Conference on International Telecommunications in Dubai, where some countries agreed to revisions to the International Telecommunications Regulations, a 1998 treaty that governs telephone services across national borders.
“While the final treaty text was disappointing, it was not as bad as it could have been,” according to the prepared testimony of Sally Shipman Wentworth, government liaison for the Internet Society, an association of scientists and engineers that sets standards for aspects of the Internet’s operation.
Ms. Wentworth praises the work of the U.S. and allied delegations that fended off the most dangerous proposed changes to the treaty, which would have given the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) — the U.N. body that administers the treaty — significant new authority over the Internet.
But she warns that the revised treaty “does contain language that could have a lasting impact on the Internet’s infrastructure and operations, and on the content that is so fundamental to its value.”
In particular, there is concern about the role the treaty creates for the ITU and signatory states in controlling spam email.
That provision will allow repressive regimes “to inspect the content of Internet messages to determine if they can be blocked [as spam] to solve so-called ‘network congestion’ issues,” according to the prepared testimony of David A. Gross, a former State Department official who was responsible for international communications and information policy.
“This provision purports to give what the ITU has referred to as a new ‘human right’ — the right to access international telecommunications services — but to give the right to governments rather than individuals,” he says in prepared testimony.
“That turns the whole concept of ‘human rights’ on its head and could give sanctioned nations — rather than individuals — a basis for arguing that restrictions on the provision of telecommunications equipment or services were violations of their ‘rights’” under the revised treaty, Mr. Gross says. “It’s a way of governments trying to get around sanctions.”
As a result of these provisions, 55 nations including the U.S., Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, India, Chile, Costa Rica, Great Britain and most other European Union nations refused to sign or deferred a decision on signing the revised International Telecommunications Regulations.
Some of those countries may have to have the treaty ratified by vote in their legislatures or some other procedure, Mr. Gross said, adding that 40 to 50 countries that are signatories of the original treaty but did not attend the Dubai conference have not signed the revised document.
© Copyright 2013 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
About the Author
Shaun Waterman is an award-winning reporter for The Washington Times, covering foreign affairs, defense and cybersecurity. He was a senior editor and correspondent for United Press International for nearly a decade, and has covered the Department of Homeland Security since 2003. His reporting on the Sept. 11 Commission and the tortuous process by which some of its recommendations finally became ...
- Game players don't think peace has a chance in Syria
- NSA monitored 'World of Warcraft' players
- New Internet security challenge arises for cybercops
- Britain eyes new powers to thwart Islamic extremists
- In global op, feds help seize websites selling fake goods
Latest Blog Entries
By Tom Fitton
New photos confirm the attack's coordination and its cover-up
- FITTON: A closer look at the Benghazi lie
- Obama eulogizes Mandela, calls him 'the last great liberator'
- Troops forced to rely on welfare, holiday charity
- Israeli P.M. Benjamin Netanyahu backs out of Nelson Mandela funeral
- Chinese man fed up with his girlfriend's shopping jumps to his death
- Obama lied about Syrian chemical attack, 'cherry-picked' intelligence: report
- CURL: Obama tells a whopper on IRS scandal
- NSA monitored 'World of Warcraft' players
- MSNBC host: Obamacare a 'wealthy white men' racist word
- American bourbon now better than Scottish whiskey: U.K.-born expert
Independent voices from the The Washington Times Communities
This column will cover the experiential spectrum of music as well as politics and all the things caught in between.
Listening to the heartbeat of Louisiana, including events, food, family and culture.
The Constitution: Every issue, every time. No exceptions, no excuses. And how to get from here to there.
Crystal Wright is a black conservative woman living in Washington, D.C.
White House pets gone wild!
Let it snow