Policy Matter: NSA Spying: The Three Pillars of Government Trust Have Fallen

AUGUST 15, 2013 | BY CINDY COHN AND MARK M. JAYCOX

With each recent revelation about the NSA's spying programs government officials have tried to reassure the American people that all three branches of government—the Executive branch, the Judiciary branch, and the Congress—knowingly approved these programs and exercised rigorous oversight over them. President Obama recited this talking point just last week, saying: "as President, I've taken steps to make sure they have strong oversight by all three branches of government and clear safeguards to prevent abuse and protect the rights of the American people."  With these three pillars of oversight in place, the argument goes, how could the activities possibly be illegal or invasive of our privacy? 

Today, the Washington Post confirmed that two of those oversight pillars—the Executive branch and the court overseeing the spying, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA court)—don't really exist. The third pillar came down slowly over the last few weeks, with Congressional revelations about the limitations on its oversight, including what Representative Sensennbrenner called "rope a dope" classified briefings. With this, the house of government trust has fallen, and it's time to act. Join the over 500,000 people demanding an end to the unconstitutional NSA spying.

First, the Executive. After a review of internal NSA audits of the spying programs provided by Edward Snowden, the Post lays out—in stark detail—that the claims of oversight inside the Executive Branch are empty. The article reveals that an internal NSA audit not shown to Congress, the President, or the FISA Court detailed thousands of violations where the NSAcollected, stored, and accessed American's communications content and other information. In one story, NSA analysts searched for all communications containing the Swedish manufacturer Ericsson and “radio” or “radar.” What's worse: the thousands of violations only include the NSA's main office in Maryland—not the other—potentially hundreds—of other NSA offices across the country. And even more importantly, the documents published by the Post reveal violations increasing every year. The news reports and documents are in direct contrast to therepeated assertions by President Obama (video), General James Clapper (video), and General Keith Alexander (video) that the US government does not listen to or look at Americans' phone calls or emails. So much for official pronouncements that oversight by the Executive was "extensive" and "robust."

Second, the FISA Court. The Post presents a second article in which the Chief Judge of the FISA Court admits that the court is unable to act as a watchdog or stop the NSA's abuses: “The FISC is forced to rely upon the accuracy of the information that is provided to the Court,” its chief, US District Judge Reggie B. Walton, said in a written statement. “The FISC does not have the capacity to investigate issues of noncompliance."  Civil liberties and privacy advocates have long said that the FISA Court is a rubber stamp when it comes to the spying, but this is worse—this is the Court admitting that it cannot conduct the oversight the President and others have claimed it is doing. So much for claims by officials from the White House (video), NSA, DOJ, andIntelligence Committee members of Congress that the FISA Court is another strong pillar of oversight.

Third, the Congress. Last week, Representative Sensenbrenner complained that "the practice of classified briefings are a 'rope-a-dope operation' in which lawmakers are given information and then forbidden from speaking out about it." Members of Congress who do not serve on the Intelligence Committees in the both the House and Senate have had difficulty in obtainingdocuments about the NSA spying. Last week, it was even uncovered that the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Mike Rogers, failed to provide freshmen members of Congress vital documents about the NSA's activities during a key vote to reapprove the spying. Senators Wyden and Udall have been desperately trying to tell the American people what is going on, but this year the House Intelligence committee's Subcommittee on Oversight has not met once and the Senate Intelligence committee has met publicly only twice. 

One, two, three pillars of government, all cited repeatedly as the justification for our trust and all now obviously nonexistent or failing miserably. It's no surprise Americans are turning against the government's explanations.

The pattern is now clear and it's getting old. With each new revelation the government comes out with a new story for why things are really just fine, only to have that assertion demolished by the next revelation. It's time for those in government who want to rebuild the trust of the American people and others all over the world to come clean and take some actual steps to rein in the NSA. And if they don't, the American people and the public, adversarial courts, must force change upon it.

We still think the first step ought to be a truly independent investigatory body that is assigned to look into the unconstitutional spying. It must be empowered to search, read and compel documents and testimony, must be required to give a public report that only redacts sensitive operational details, and must suggest specific legislation and regulatory changes to fix the problem—something like the Church Committee or maybe even the 9/11 Commission. The President made a mockery of this idea recently, by initially handing control of the "independent" investigation he announced in his press conference to the man who most famously lied to Congress and the American people about the spying, the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

The three pillars of American trust have fallen. It's time to get a full reckoning and build a new house from the wreckage, but it has to start with some honesty.

Source: 

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/08/nsa-spying-three-pillars-government-trust-have-fallen

Where Teens Seek Online Privacy Advice: New Findings from Pew and the Berkman Center

WASHINGTON – (August 15, 2013) – Many teens ages 12-17 report that they usually figure out how to manage content sharing and privacy settings on their own. Focus group interviews with teens suggest that for their day-to-day privacy management, teens are guided through their choices in the app or platform when they sign up, or find answers through their own searching and use of their preferred platform.

At the same time, though, a nationally representative survey of teen internet users shows that, at some point, 70% of them have sought advice from someone else about how to manage their privacy online. When they do seek outside help, teens most often turn to friends, parents or other close family members.

Access the full report here.

About the Survey

These findings are based on a nationally representative phone survey of 802 parents and their 802 teens ages 12-17. It was conducted between July 26 and September 30, 2012. Interviews were conducted in English and Spanish and on landline and cell phones. The margin of error for the full sample is ± 4.5 percentage points. In collaboration with the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard, this report also includes insights and quotes gathered through a series of in-person focus group interviews about privacy and digital media, with a focus on social networking sites (in particular Facebook), conducted by the Berkman Center’s Youth and Media Project between February and April 2013. The team conducted 24 focus group interviews with a total of 156 participants across the greater Boston area, Los Angeles, Santa Barbara (California), and Greensboro (North Carolina).

About the Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project

The Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project is one of seven projects that make up the Pew Research Center, a nonpartisan, nonprofit “fact tank” that provides information on the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world. The Project produces reports exploring the impact of the Internet on families, communities, work and home, daily life, education, health care, and civic and political life. The Project aims to be an authoritative source on the evolution of the Internet through surveys that examine how Americans use the Internet and how their activities affect their lives.

About the Berkman Center for Internet & Society

The Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University is a research program founded to recognize, study, and engage the most difficult problems of the digital age and to share in their resolution in ways that advance the public interest. Founded in 1997, through a generous gift from Jack N. and Lillian R. Berkman, the Center is home to an ever-growing community of faculty, fellows, staff, and affiliates. Fundamental to its work is the study of the relationship between digital technologies and democratic values, including civic participation, access to knowledge, and the free flow of information. More information can be found at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu.

Source: 

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/node/8443

Policy Matter: ICTs and local service delivery in Bangladesh

Authors: Partha Sarker and Anir Chowdhury

Introduction

Over the last 40 years, Bangladesh has become an interesting case study where its low per capita income (USD 700), low literacy rate (around 50%), insignificant computer literacy level and low grid-electricity penetration (less than 50%), coupled with its high population density (1,142.29 people per sq. km in 2010),¹ could not retard its success in human development indicators. Bangladesh has moved up 81% in the Human Development Index (HDI) over the last 30 years. With 99% primary school enrolment, a decreased infant mortality rate (from 145 deaths per 1,000 live births in 1970 to 46 in 2003)² and an increased food security level (near self-sufficiency), it has positioned itself as one of the countries that is geared towards achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). It also has 90 million mobile phone users, 2.7 million Facebook users, and 99% geographical coverage in voice and data connectivity (mostly through wireless networks)³ – proving the country has attained initial readiness for service delivery using information and communications technologies (ICTs).

But all these gains have been achieved despite a widely acknowledged governance failure.⁴ That governance failure is often demonstrated by the levels and perceptions of corruption within the country. For five years in a row (2000-2005), Bangladesh topped the global Corruption Perceptions Index prepared by Transparency International.⁵

Policy and political background

Corruption has multiple effects in a society. As Amartya Sen points out, “a high level of corruption can make public policies ineffective and can also draw investment and economic activities away from productive pursuits towards the towering rewards of underhanded activities.”⁶ The World Bank has identified corruption as the “single greatest obstacle to economic and social development.” In 2004 it estimated that more than USD 1 trillion is paid in bribes globally each year.

In Bangladesh, like other countries, corruption has both direct and indirect effects on the poor. Indirect implications of corruption on the poor include diverting government resources away at the expense of social sector benefits. Direct implications include the fact that corruption increases the cost of key public services targeted to them, and results in restricted or limited access to essential services, as is shown in Figures 1 and 2.⁷

It is generally considered that Bangladesh loses 3% of its GDP due to corruption.⁸Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) suggests that almost 75% of more than USD 35 billion in aid received since independence has been lost to corruption. Mauro says, “If Bangladesh were able to reduce corruption by one standard deviation to the level of Uruguay, its investment rate would increase by almost 5% and its annual rate of growth would rise by over one-half percent.”⁹

There are several policies or legislations that address the issue of corruption in Bangladesh.¹⁰ These include the Money Laundering Prevention Act (MLPA) that enabled the government to set up the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) with ICT facilities. The Anti-Corruption Act 2004 helped the Bangladeshi government set up the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) with financial independence. The Public Procurement Act 2006 is aimed at ensuring accountability and transparency in public procurement of goods, works or services, and free and fair competition among all the persons interested in taking part in such procurement.

One of the objectives of the National ICT Policy of Bangladesh¹¹ adopted in 2009 is to ensure “integrity”. It has three strategic themes which have a number of action items directly aimed at the reduction of corruption in government. One specific item, namely action item no. 67, states: “[By allowing] citizens to report cases of corruption electronically this would empower citizens by giving them a voice in fighting corruption, thus helping the government fight corruption more effectively.” It was a “short-term action” (to be implemented within 18 months) with the ACC identified as the principal implementing agency.

Local administration and public service delivery¹²

Over the past decades, a wide range of useful services to citizens have been provided by the Deputy Commissioner (DC) offices regarding control and supervision of revenue, maintenance of public order and security, licences and certificates, land acquisitions, census, relief and rehabilitation, social welfare, pension matters, education and public examinations, public complaints and enquiries. The conventional system of office management and service delivery at the DC offices is paper-based, which is time consuming and labour intensive for both the service provider and receiver. DC offices are also unable to meet the high demand for services from the growing population. Moreover, the inflexibility of this process coupled with the shortage of manpower and infrastructure make the services prone to abuse and corruption.

A national household survey¹³ conducted by TIB in 2010 found that 88% of the respondents were victims of corruption in the judiciary, followed by corruption in law enforcement agencies (79.7%), land administration (71.2%), and taxation and customs (51.3%). In terms of bribery collection, law enforcement agencies were at the top (68.7%), followed by land administration (67%), the judiciary (59.9%), and taxation and customs (43.9%). The survey also revealed that 66% of respondents reported having to pay a bribe to access basic services in the previous 12 months, while 46% believed that corruption has increased.

In order to address this situation, District e-Service Centres (DESC) and Union (the lowest tier of local government institutions) Information and Services Centres (UISC) have been introduced to improve the accessibility and transparency of public service delivery at the local and remote level.

District e-Service Centres (DESC)¹⁴

A DESC centre is an ICT-facilitated one-stop service centre which provides an efficient electronic version of the century-old manual and heavily bureaucratic service delivery system at every DC office. DESC centres have the following objectives:

• To ensure service delivery at the doorstep of the people in the least possible time.
• To uphold citizens’ rights to information through an extensive information flow.
• To reduce corruption and increase accountability by ensuring an enhanced flow of information and more transparent processes.

The services available at the DC office can be requested and received through the one-stop service counters, online, by phone, by post or by fax.

The first centre was piloted in the Jessore DC office in September 2010. Subsequently, more centres were brought online throughout 2011. Finally, on 14 November 2011, Bangladeshi Prime Minister Shaikh Hasina and United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon jointly inaugurated DESCs in all 64 districts of the country. Citizens are now able to submit their applications online from service centres located at the DC office, Union Parishad or even from their own home without having to travel to the district headquarters.

Upon submitting their applications, citizens receive an SMS notification with a receipt number and date of service delivery. In addition, citizens will also be able to submit their applications through the District Portal from anywhere in the world, including all the Union Information and Service Centres. Citizens are notified through either SMS or email once the service is ready to be delivered. They can choose to receive the service in-person from the concerned DC office or by postal mail if the application is regarding requests for any documents. During the waiting period, citizens are able to check the status of their lodged applications though SMS or District Portals. This has allowed citizens to avoid in-person visits to DC offices, which previously gave birth to corrupt practices.

Union Information and Service Centres (UISC)¹⁵

UISCs are newly established one-stop service outlets operating at all 4,545 Union Parishads (lowest tier of local government) of the country. Through the use of ICTs, a UISC is able to bring various types of information related to government, livelihood and private services to the doorstep of citizens in rural areas. It ensures that service providers and users save time and cost, and has made operations hassle free. Operating under the Public-Private-People Partnership (PPPP) modality, these centres are run by local entrepreneurs, hosted by Union Parishads and supported by the central administration.

UISCs began operations in 2009 in 30 Union Parishads through partnership between the Local Government Division and Access to Information (A2I) programme. The Quick Win initiative expanded rapidly, culminating in a launch in all 4,545 Union Parishads on 11 November 2010 by the prime minister of Bangladesh and UNDP administrator.

Each UISC is operated by two young local entrepreneurs – a male and a female – under the supervision of a local advisory headed by the Union Parishad’s chairman. The Union Parishad provides space and utilities for the centre. The Local Government Division coordinates with the Cabinet Division and Bangladesh Computer Council to establish the basic ICT setup, including computers, laptops, printers, multimedia projector, digital camera, webcam and solar panel. The entrepreneurs are free to install additional facilities to support business growth, at the same time ensuring that the social sustainability of the centre is achieved by delivering government information and services.

Results achieved

Greater access and efficient processing have reduced barriers of culture, class, gender and distance in the delivery of public services. DESCs have made the service delivery process easy by minimising layers of red tape, time, hassle and cost for citizens. Travelling long distances and standing in long queues to receive services in district headquarters has been eliminated. Services have become truly decentralised with the access to DESC at union level through district portals. An enhanced tracking system ensures more accountability and transparency in public service delivery, leading to better governance.

The average official fee to get a copy of a simple land record is BDT 8 (USD 0.10). However, because of the corrupt practices of unscrupulous middlemen, the bribe paid to them is easily 20 to 100 times this amount. Now, with the introduction of e‑services to access land records, the official fee is the only fee paid by the citizens, since the middlemen have no access to how the electronic transactions are done. The elimination of face-to-face interaction with the middlemen has brought about this result.

Also, citizens are saving a significant amount of time and money since they now do not have to travel to district headquarters. Previously, money would be spent on travel for the applicant, travel for an escort accompanying an applicant who is a woman, elderly, illiterate or has a disability, the opportunity cost in terms of daily wages for the applicant and the escort, and sometimes an overnight stay in district headquarters, all of which would create a significant financial burden for the applicant. DESCs accessible from UISCs have eliminated most of these costs.

The tracking number received over mobile phone is a remarkable addition for the elimination of corruption – it allows citizens to track the status of processing and brings a higher measure of predictability. Previously, the unpredictability and the long delays would open up opportunities for rent seeking by non-officer middlemen and sometimes even government officers.

In addition, the dashboards visible to the higher authorities displaying the status of application processing put the officers in the DC office on high alert, increasing efficiency and reducing the tendency to ask for bribes from citizen applicants.

The electronic documents and land records are less prone to corrupt practices of tampering than their paper counterparts. And even if hackers emerge among the government officers, the introduction of digital signatures starting in 2013 will safeguard the electronic documents, adding another barrier to corrupt practices.

Since 14 November 2011,¹⁶ all DC offices combined have finalised 809,219 applications, while 1,280,576 applications are in process; 389,423 land records have been delivered to citizens against 758,153 applications received. Four million citizens visit the UISCs per month to access various services. 

Action steps

As indicated by the TIB survey, the majority of corruption occurs at the level of services that the government provides to the general public. Initially the Bangladeshi government pursued automation to improve internal processing and coordination. This resulted in an expensive procurement of state-of-the-art equipment, but did not bring any qualitative change at the service delivery end. Neither did it stop the corrupt practices. Therefore it is important that the government pursue innovative approaches, such the DESCs and UISCs, and bring as much openness, automation and transparency as possible through decentralisation and e‑services. The government should start to use its National e‑GP Portal for e‑procurement of goods and services. Currently, any local tender package up to BDT 500 million (USD 6 million) for goods or works and up to BDT 100 million (USD 1.2 million) for services can now be processed through this portal.

In order to address corruption, the government needs to protect whistleblowers and encourage ICT-based communication allowing anonymity. The parliament enacted an act for protection of whistleblowers in 2011. This needs to be promoted along with the Right to Information Act that may encourage others to seek or share information on corruption taking place even in remote areas.

It is generally believed that ICTs can eliminate the need or possibility of direct face-to-face interaction for people seeking information or services, thereby reducing the chances of abuse of decretory power by officials and opportunities for corruption. But this needs to be backed by enough political will and institutional strengthening efforts. The ACC can prepare a strategic plan for harnessing the full potential of ICTs in its activities, both in prevention and enforcement. Citizens need to be engaged and encouraged to be vigilant in an innovative way that brings forward an anti-corruption friendly environment. 

Report Year:   

 2012 - The internet and corruption

Organization: 

 Bytes for All Bangladesh

Website: 

 http://www.bytesforall.org

Bangladesh	260.26 KB

Source: http://www.giswatch.org/en/country-report/transparency-and-accountability-online/bangladesh

1 World Bank data on Bangladesh: data.worldbank.org/country/bangladesh

2 UN Human Development Indicators on Bangladesh:hdrstats.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/bgd.html

3 Bangladesh Telecom Regulatory Commission: www.btrc.gov.bd

4 Zaman, I. (2006) Measuring Corruption in Bangladesh: Can Communication Work?, Transparency International Bangladesh. ti-bangladesh.org/index.php/research-a-knowledge

5 www.transparency.org

6 Sen, A. (1999) Development as Freedom, Oxford University Press, Oxford, p. 275.

7 Zaman (2006) op. cit.

8 ti-bangladesh.org

9 Mauro, P. (1995) Corruption and Growth, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110 (3), p. 681-712.

10 Iqbal, M. (2008) Tackling Corruption in South Asia: Are the Recent Initiatives Enough? An Appraisal of Bangladesh, Korea University, Seoul.

11 bdictforum.wordpress.com/2012/03/14/national-ict-policy-2009-of-bangladesh

12 UNDP (2012) Project document of the “Access to Information (II): E-service delivery for transparency and responsiveness” project.

13 Transparency International Bangladesh (2010) Corruption in the Service Sectors: National Household Survey 2010. www.ti-bangladesh.org/research/Executive%20Summary_23122010%20FINAL.pdf

14 UNDP (2012) op. cit.

15 Ibid.

16 Chowdhury, A. (2012) Service Delivery Transformation in Bangladesh: ICT as the Catalyst and Lessons from Korea.

Pirate Bay's 10th birthday is a milestone for internet freedom

• 
• • Loz Kaye
  • theguardian.com, Monday 12 August 2013 11.30 BST
  • Ten years on, the groundbreaking filesharing site is still an emblem of the debate over censorship and digital policy

Pirate Bay's first server is on display at the Technical Museum in Stockholm. Photograph: Scanpix Sweden/Reuters

An internet milestone has just been reached: Pirate Bay has passed its 10th anniversary. The iconic/notorious site (pick your adjective)celebrated with a party just outside Stockholm. Who knows, perhaps entertainment bosses were simultaneously weeping into their champagne and plotting new action against their favourite enemy. The filesharing hub is arguably the most famous of all sites providing access to torrent files and magnet links to allow peer-to-peer sharing. If that means nothing to you, it's like being able to swap those tapes you made of Radio 1 chart shows with anyone in the world.

While the dilemmas posed by filesharing are of course not new, the site has become emblematic of the two sides of the 21st-century data-sharing debate. In simple terms, there are two conflicting ideologies. For advocates of intellectual property, revenue and cultural value is created by restricting access to information. For internet freedom advocates, revenue and cultural value is created by opening up access to information. Obviously these two approaches are bound to clash with each other.

Given the last decade's copyright wars, it's amazing that Pirate Bay survived at all, not just because 10 is antediluvian in internet years. In the fight to retain control of the information flow, Pirate Bay has been the subject of site blocks, court cases, dramatic intercontinental manhunts and media controversy. Here in the UK, major ISPs were forced by an injunction in April 2012 to block access to the site.

It was the 2006 police raid on the Pirate Bay servers that was the "Stonewall moment" for digital-rights activists – when the state overstepped the mark and it was vital to fight back. The key realisation was that the internet isn't separate from society, and political action is necessary if key freedoms are to be defended.

The site itself can't be divorced from its cultural context, the hacktivist digital dissidence scene. Pirate Bay represents the punk music of the 21st century: while popular music is reduced to sugary talent-show fodder, online counterculture is noisy, rebellious and disruptive. The cool kids aren't writing lyrics, they are writing code. This is the heart of Pirate Bay's tenacity. It's no longer just about the service it provides, it's because Pirate Bay has come to symbolise web liberty for many.

This is well understood by the entertainment industry, and I've experienced it personally. Last year Music Week knew the BPI wanted to shut down the Pirate Bay proxy site that the Pirate party was running even before I received the BPI's letter.

This, to me, shows how empty the fight against Pirate Bay has become. The UK block only dented P2P for a matter of days. Politically, it's become evident governments are less willing to have digital policy hijacked by narrow corporate interests. In France the expensive Hadopi "three strikes" regime is being abandoned. Here, the Digital Economy Act's site-blocking provisions are to be dropped.

That's not to say there aren't significant challenges to digital rights. Activists warned that snooping on what people download would lend legitimacy to mass surveillance, that allowing site-blocking was a dangerous tool to give governments and that removing pirate-related search terms would lead to wider filtering. A suitable 10th-anniversary souvenir might be a "we told you so" T-shirt.

Those of us who were galvanised by the Pirate Bay crackdowns have moved on, focusing on the broader picture of internet surveillance, censorship and bridging the digital divide. Co-founder Peter Sunde called for the site to close, to allow something new to develop. If we can move on, so can others. It's time for the entertainment lobby to ditch attempts to clamp down on technological advances and abandon the tired pirate narrative.

Like it or not, Pirate Bay is a key part of internet history. So, let's join a rousing chorus of Happy Birthday. Oh wait, it's under copyright and the subject of a court case...