To
Dear Hamada Tadahisa,
Namaste
Thank you for attending the III Prepcom Meeting in Geneva.
This is Literary Academy for Dalit of Nepal (LAD-Nepal), we are working in
Nepal.
We came to about your organization JCAFE, so that we would like to develop
relationship with your organization coming future.
LAD-Nepal is accredited organization in World Summit on the Information
Society WSIS and to attended many prepcom meetings, thematic meetings and
conference.
We will try to attend upcoming Tunis Summit in Tunisia November 14-18, 2005.
We are waiting your good response
Sincerely yours
Kesh Bahadur Pariyar
President
LAD-Nepal
E-mail: ladnepal@hotmail.com
Kathmandu, Nepal
>From: Hamada Tadahisa <taratta@jca.or.jp>
>Reply-To: communication@wsisasia.org
>To: communication@wsisasia.org
>Subject: [communication 1406] Convention on Cybercrime
>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 01:28:03 +0900
>
>Dear all,
>
>I'm in Geneva since 23rd night. I participated in the CRIS meeting on
>24th and 25th, and am attending official meetings.
>
>There is a movement to adopt the Council of Europe Convention on
>Cybercrime as WSIS (Council of Europe and US delegate may have proposed).
>I found that the Convention on Cybercrime was in the document today. And
>now governments of China and Russia are opposing, so now the phrases below
>seems to be still in the brackets.
>
>================================================================
>Sub-Committee A - Room Document 6
>(http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs2/pc3/room-docs/6.pdf)
>
>New Para 50.
>
>We underline the importance of effective instruments and efficient
>mechanisms for the prosecution of cybercrime, including crime committed
>in one jurisdiction but having effects in another.
>
>We call upon governments, in cooperation with other stakeholders, to
>develop national legislation for the investigation and prosecution of
>cybercrime, taking into account existing international frameworks, such
>as the Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime
>================================================================
>
>This Convention on Cybercrime might cause grievous harm on human rights.
>I will give a brief explanation of the Convention below for those who
>are not familiar with the Convention.
>
>
>(adapted from the expalation by EPIC)
>
>According to the preamble, the main aim of the Convention is to pursue
>"a common criminal policy aimed at the protection of society against
>cybercrime, inter alia by adopting appropriate legislation and fostering
>international co-operation."
>
>The Convention includes a list of crimes that each signatory state must
>transpose into their own law. It requires the criminalization of such
>activities as hacking (including the production, sale, or distribution
>of hacking tools) and offenses relating to child pornography, and
>expands criminal liability for intellectual property violations. It also
>requires each signatory state to implement certain procedural mechanisms
>within their laws. For example, law enforcement authorities must be
>granted the power to compel an Internet Service Provider to monitor a
>person's activities online in real time. Finally, the Convention
>requires signatory states to provide international cooperation to the
>"widest extent possible" for investigations and proceedings concerning
>criminal offenses related to computer systems and data, or for the
>collection of evidence in electronic form of a criminal offense. Law
>enforcement agencies will have to assist police from other participating
>countries to cooperate with their "mutual assistance requests."
>
>
>Independent legal experts and human rights activists have continually
>posited objections to the Convention because it threatens core civil
>liberties protections. Common criticisms are that the treaty fails to
>provide meaningful privacy and civil liberties protections, and that its
>scope is too broad and covers much more than computer-related crimes.
>The treaty also lacks a "dual criminality" provision, under which an
>activity must be considered a crime in both countries before one state
>could demand cooperation from another. Thus, the treaty would require
>law enforcement authorities to cooperate with foreign police forces even
>when such agencies are investigating an activity that, while
>constituting a crime in their territory, is perfectly legal in a state.
>
>Furthermore, the drafting of the treaty has been conducted in a very
>secretive and undemocratic manner, and did not take human rights' groups
>concerns into account. For this reason, the treaty seems more like a law
>enforcement "wish list" than an international instrument truly
>respectful of human rights already enshrined in many international
>conventions, such as the 1948 Declaration of Human Rights and the 1950
>European Convention of Human Rights. Again, no major European country
>has ratified this treaty at this time.
>
>- Taratta
>
>===============================================//=======================
> Hamada Taratta http://dreamery.ne.jp/
> ViVa! volunteer net http://www.viva.ne.jp/
>Japan Computer Access for Empowerment http://www.jcafe.net/
> See everything as if for the first time. // 3*7*11*13*(2*5+17*19)
> Do everything as if for the last time. // 7*9*11*13*(5*15+17+19)
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/