Online news has reported that the government is serious in countering online allegations against them by taking alleged wrongdoers to court for defamation and sedition. This decision was said to have been reached during a meeting last week involving several Cabinet ministers and senior government officials, including Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak.

The government now realises that online news is the preferred information source over mainstream media for Malaysians. It was reported that the government understands the significance of leaving online allegations unchecked, especially after their failing to secure two-thirds majority in the lower Parliamentary house during the March 8^th elections, as well as the recent landslide victory of Opposition icon, Anwar Ibrahim, during yesterday’s by-elections in Permatang Pauh.

After decades of managing information through legislation regulating mainstream media, the government faces frustration with the availability of online information. Malaysia’s Communications & Multimedia Act 1998 disallows censorship of the Internet, leaving the government only three legal alternatives: on a national level, sedition and the provisions under Internal Security Act 1960 (which allows for detention without trial); and on a private level, defamation law suits (see also Jeff Ooi on defamation).

This year has seen the government dealing with blogger Raja Petra Kamaruddin (or RPK) for sedition, while there are ongoing investigations against blogger Sheih, also for sedition. Blogger Bakaq was taken in recently for questioning,  also for alleged sedition. Aside from this, RPK faces a defamation action. As such, the stance of the government against bloggers appears quite clear. Critics have called for less focus on alternative news, but rather greater accountability and transparency. They have also called for the abolition of the legal shackles on the mainstream media.

On a possibly related issue, bloggers have reported that RPK’s news portal, Malaysia Today, might have been blocked by authorities. Apparently, the news portal cannot be accessed through any TM connections. TM is run by Telekom Malaysia, Malaysia’s largest Internet service provider. Online news site Malaysiakini has confirmed in its report that RPK’s Malaysia Today has been blocked by the order of Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC).

Malaysia Today can be accessed through its mirror site here.

Three more blogs have been blocked in Tunisia this week. These blogs, Mochagheb (Disturber), Ennaqed (The Critic) and Place Mohamed Ali have all been particularly active in providing news of the struggle of The Tunisian General Labour Union (UGTT), and especially about the latest social unrest in the southwestern phosphate mining region of Gafsa, where two people have been killed. One was shot dead by security forces and the other was electrocuted inside a local electric generator.

I asked the Tunisian blogger Ennaqed about the censorship of his blog in Tunisia. He said:

I think that the main reason of banning my blog is crossing the “red lines” that are constraining the media in Tunisia by talking about issues that are completely ignored by mainstream media. Last year, I was seriously engaged in covering the hunger strike of three Tunisian secondary school teachers who were expelled from their jobs for political reasons, and my blog was blocked temporarily. And like the rest of the Tunisian bloggers, I was blogging about the revolt in the mining region and recently about the prisoner swap between Israel and Hezbullah, and the remains of eight Tunisian men handed over by Israel. But, honestly, I think that the most direct reason for banning my blog might be my last blog post about the participation of an Israeli delegation in the 31st Congress of the International Geography Union (IGU) that is taking place in Tunisia. What I actually did is copy and re-post a press release about a group of Palestinian geographers who are boycotting the aforementioned conference because of Israeli participation.

On June 21 the censorship passed beyond all reason and banned the first and only podcasting Tunisian blog Radyoun (Radio) run by a group of Tunisian bloggers dedicated to discussing social and cultural topics. Apparently, the podcast debate about the sporadic protests in the poor mining region of Gasfa and about the freedom of expression led to the banning of the blog.

This is a non-comprehensive list of blocked blogs in Tunisia. Please keep in mind that the list does not include blocked websites:

1. Citizen Zouari‬, blog of Tunisian journalist and former political prisoner, Abdallah Zouari.
2. The Free Pen the blog of Tunisian journalist and former political prisoner, Slim Boukhdhir. In July 2007, this blog was also hacked and deleted.
3. ‫Mokhtar Yahyaoui‬, blog of a former Tunisian judge who was dismissed after publishing an open letter to President Ben Ali criticising the lack of independence of the judiciary.
4. Tunisia Watch, this blog is also run by Mokhtar Yahyaoui‬.
5. Astrubal
6. [fikra] blog of Tunisian activist and political refugee Sami Ben Gharbia.
7. Nawaat, popular group blog about news, politics, cyber-activism and Islamic reform.
8. Radyoun, the podcasting Tunisian blog.
9. Moaz Jmai. (this blog has been blocked in Tunisia where I’m writing this post)
10. Place Mohamed Ali (this blog has been blocked in Tunisia where I’m writing this post)
11. Sofiane Chourabi.
12. Nader.
13. Free Race.
14. Samsoum .
15. Tunisian Citizen.
16. For Gafsa.
17. Mochagheb.
18. Annaqued.
19. Zabbaleh.
20. Adam.
21. Moumni.
22. Free Word.

Attacks on video-sharing websites

Despite the fact that Tunisian authorities have permanently blocked access to both popular video-sharing websites Dailymotion and YouTube, on 3 September, 2007 and 2 November, 2007 respectively, Tunisian netizens have still managed to access these websites to either watch or share videos. And while the Tunisian government worked hard to ensure that the polished image of a “secular, modern and democratic” state would not be marred by any “negative” information disseminated by opponents on the web, Tunisian video activists and bloggers kept the spotlight on the Redeyef revolt exposing harsh repression and flooding both banned video-sharing websites Youtube and Dailymotion with footage of demonstrators, protesting against unemployment and nepotism, clashing with the police. And when the official media remained silent about the death of two demonstrators, videos of the victims, the wounded and the use of firearms against civilians, were smuggled out of Tunisia and posted on the video-sharing websites.

The anti-censorship campaigns

Interest in online censorship in Tunisia has never been higher since the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) in Tunis in November 2005 when a hardcore group of Tunisian bloggers and activists supported by sympathizers, organized a successful online campaign around Yezzi Fock Ben Ali (Enough is enough, Ben Ali) a “Freedom of Expression in Mourning!” campaign, the entire field of the online battle for freedom of speech has changed. The transformation owes to the growing number of bloggers, video and Facebook activists who are walking down the path of digital activism that was gradually and patiently traced by the first pioneers of the Tunisian online free speech movement who brilliantly used web 2.0 tools (videos, mash-ups, photos, etc.) to protest the crackdown on online free speech.

Badges of Tunisian online anticensorship campaigns

There is a growing number of blog posts and comments talking and/or protesting censorship. According to the advanced search engine of the recently launched North African Blogs aggregator, Berberus (Beta), of the 274 blog posts containing the word “censure” (censorship), 165 are Tunisian.

And of the 256 comments containing the same word, 98 were left on Tunisian blogs.

Compared with other North African Internet users, Tunisian Netizens seem to be much more interested in censorship than their counterparts in Algeria and Morocco. This trend is confirmed by the following graphs, generated by Google Insights for Search:

Back to April 2007. Following the ban on Dailymotion, Tunisian bloggers and activists from Nawaat.org launched the “Unblock Dailymotion campaign” in order to draw public attention to the aggressive online censorship policy adopted by the Tunisian regime. Cybversion.org blog was created to protest the ban of the Dailymotion and has since evolved into a group blog documenting censorship, anti-censorship and digital activism in Tunisia.

Fifty-one Tunisian bloggers are now running a new anti-censorship blog campaign launched on June 20 that encourages the local blogsphere to republish posts from censored blogs as part of the campaign to sensitize the public to the issue of online free speech. The blog campaign has received a lot of media attention from the Arab world and has been featured on the official website of Al Jazeera and the Qatari “Al-Arab” newspaper.

Badges and a headline widgets that use the free Feed2JS service displaying headlines of the anti-censorship blog campaign have been designed to build community around the blogs and help Tunisian bloggers stay updated about newly published content.
July 1st, is now “I blog for freedom of expression” day which Tunisian bloggers celebrate by blogging about free speech and/or by displaying a badge. Meanwhile, from time to time, Tunisian bloggers carry out ad-hoc campaigns to protest the banning of specific blogs or websites like the Blank Post Day that has been organized twice: the first time on 25 December 2006 and the second on 25 December 2007.

Tunisian netizens bid farewell to Facebook

On the social networking websites, Facebook, several groups protesting online censorship in Tunisia have been created.The most important one has so far gathered more than 620 members. Other groups have been created requesting the ATI (The Tunisian Internet Agency, which oversees Web distribution in the country) not to block Facebeook, which, unfortunately, seems to be blocked since yesterday by at least two of the country’s largest ISPs (Globalnet and PlaNet), as reported by several Tunisian bloggers and Facebook groups who were faced yesterday with the famous Tunisian 404 block page that states that the requested Web site could not be found.

It’s far more than just censorship

Blocking web 2.0 websites (Youtube, Dailymotion, Facebook) and barring access to local outspoken websites and blogs is the most obvious way of cracking down of the online free speech in Tunisia. It should be emphasized, however, that this is only one tool in the regime’s hand. Tunisia has adapted to the web 2.0 revolution by developing a broader strategy composed of a wide range of instruments including:
Punishing and persecuting outspoken online writers, bloggers and dissidents:
Between 2001 and 2008 more than 12 people have been arrested and/or sentenced because of their online activities:

1. The seven cyber dissidents known as the Youth of Zarzis;
2. The cyber dissident Zouhair Yahyaoui;
3. The forum administrator Ramzi Bettibi, known as the Tunisian “prisoner of the Net;
4. The online writer and Human rights advocate Mohamed Abbou;
5. The online Journalist and blogger Slim Boukhdhir;
6. The journalist and blogger Mohamed Fourati;
7. And while the last prisoner of opinion, blogger and Internet journalist Slim Boukhdhir, has been released from jail on 21 July, the Tunisian human rights NGO, Freedom and Equity, reported that a 22-year old ICT Student, Mariam Zouaghi, has been arrested, on July 26th, 2008, for visiting banned websites.

Creating an atmosphere of fear:

As is the case of China, creating a strong atmosphere of fear and a climate of intimidation has led Tunisian citizen to in general adopt a low profile vis-a-vis freedom of expression. During the last 7 years, most internet users and bloggers were censoring themselves by avoiding to raise their voices to address political topics or write freely bypassing the strict state censorship. Only a handful of activists, cyber dissidents and bloggers, usually the same men, are leading the free speech movement on the Internet, going well beyond these limits and even organizing an online anti-propaganda machine to the official one.

Hacking of dissident websites and blogs:

Almost every single Tunisian opposition website and self-hosted blog has been the victim of one or more hacking incidents. While there is no solid evidence that the Tunisian regime is behind attempts to take down opponent websites, there is quite a strong feeling among Tunisian opposition figures that the government is carrying out cyber-attacks, given their frequency and the nature of the targeted websites and blogs.

Moncef Marzouki, one of Tunisia’s most prominent human rights defenders (former President of the Tunisian League for Human Rights and leader of the banned opposition party Congrès Pour la République) openly accused the Tunisian regime of orchestrating and waging these destructive attacks against the opposition Web: “In a week my website was hacked four times (…) All of this, of course, happened simultaneously with the hacking of web based email accounts that the Tunisian police is carrying out against Human rights advocates and political opponents.”

Screenshots of hacked Tunisian websites

What we have seen more recently is that the attack on collective blog Nawaat.org (deleting of the database and ftp files) happened simultaneously with the hacking of the personal blogs and email accounts of the activists running Nawaat. According to a press release issued on 16 June, 2008, Reporters Without Borders stated that:

The Tunisian news and blog wesbite Nawaat (http://www.nawaat.org/) yesterday suffered its most serious hacker attack since its creation. Its database was erased and its home page was modified (see photo). Blogs by human rights activists Sami Ben Gharbia (http://www.kitab.nl/ ) and Astrubal (http://astrubal.nawaat.org/) were also affected. Their blogs continue to be inaccessible and their databases have been badly damaged. The websites have been restored although some dysfunction continues.

This is a non comprehensive list of targeted blogs and websites:

Filtering emails:

As reported earlier by Reporters Without Borders and some Tunisian NGOs, Tunisian human rights defenders are having trouble reading their emails on the three important web based mail clients: Yahoo, Gmail and Hotmail:

Reporters Without Borders is also surprised by the problems Tunisian Internet users are having with their email. Messages sent to them by human rights organisations such as the International Association for Supporting Political Prisoners (AISPP), the Tunisnews website or Reporters Without Borders are illegible on arrival.

Several sources said the messages can be seen in the inbox and can be opened, but often there is nothing inside. Once opened, they disappear from the inbox. “It looks like badly concealed filtering,” a specialist said.

It is worth noting that the issue does not affect “fresh/new” webmail accounts and it only happens when you log in to these accounts from within Tunisia. I have personally run a test, from The Netherlands with Tunisian lawyer Abdel Wahab Maatar and Tunisian blogger, activist, and former political prisoner Abdallah Zouari. I logged into their email accounts and was able to read their emails normally. The content I saw displayed was not the same they were reading. Here are two screenshots of the test. The first is from The Netherlands where I’m base and the second from Tunisia:

So it seems the email accounts of some Tunisian Internet users are being monitored by Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) without their knowledge. DPI is a technology that has the ability to monitor the online activity and filter the traffic on the network by removing “unwanted” material from the actual body of received emails.

Recently, I asked Robert Guerra - a Toronto-base technologist who helps NGOs with data privacy, secure communications and information security about this. These are his comments:

At first glance, seems that there’s some realtime interception of webmail and possibly other traffic is taking place. In a way, it looks like there’s a network neutrality issue… Perhaps Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) is being used. If indeed DPI is taking place, it might be worthwhile to raise it on the numerous DPI discussions that are taking place. The discussion in Canada is quite active, one where activists could use the Tunisian example to help their case. (…) it might be that existing accounts have been compromised in some way. Should ask if the accounts that are being affected were accessed at public (ie. net cafe) pc’s . if so, passwords might have been captured.

The answer is not to detain another blogger for sedition.

Malaysian bloggers were up in arms again when blogger Bakaq aka ‘Penarik Beca’ was detained for sedition recently. Bakaq, whose real name is Abdul Rashi Abu Bakar, was detained (and since released) for defacing the Royal Malaysian Police crest by allegedly substituting the tiger in the emblem with a dog.

According to newspaper reports, the 50-year old was taken from his home by four plainclothes policemen,  who had also seized the blogger’s laptop and mobile phone.

It was reported that Bakaq was arrested under s. 4(1)(c) of the Sedition Act 1948, which states:

4. (1) Any person who…

(c) prints, publishes, sells, offers for sale, distributes or reproduces any seditious publication…

shall be guilty of an offence and shall, on conviction, be liable for a first offence to a fine not exceeding five thousand ringgit or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or to both, and, for a subsequent offence, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years; and any seditious publication found in the possession of the person or used in evidence at his trial shall be forfeited and may be destroyed or otherwise disposed of as the court directs.

Bakaq’s seditious publication also included alleged derogatory remarks by him on his blog about Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan. It was reported that Bakaq had claimed that Musa was controlled by Chinese crime syndicates.

A joint press statement by Malaysian’s National Alliance of Bloggers and the Centre for Policy Initiatives was released on the same day of Bakaq’s detention condemning the move. Bloggers were riled, and some began a “Free Bakaq” online movement.

Bakaq was reported to have been released the following day, and is required to report in person to the Federal Commercial Crimes Investigation Department on August 20th 2008. Although he had apologised for replacing the tiger in the police logo with a barking dog, Bakaq was reported to have said, “I defended and still defend what I wrote.”

As yet, it is unclear what charges Bakaq now faces, and for which publishing. If it is merely on what he wrote (and not for defacing the police logo), surely then the question is private matter of defamation, and the taxpayers’ money is better spent elsewhere than funding the suppression of online expression?

However, In light of developments in the Malaysian blogosphere, it is unsurprising that the country’s authorities criticise blogs for allegedly spreading rumours and/or inciting hatred towards the Government. Many opposition leaders have taken to blogs, which openly question and/or criticise policy and leadership. Malaysia’s former premier, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamed, has his own blog, CheDet, which is known to carry his usual witticisms and criticisms, even on his successor, current Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Badawi.

Press quickly jumped into conclusions saying that Russia was attacking Georgia both on the ground and on-line and that was the first cyberwar with a government attacking other also on the Internet, probably by paid “hackers” working for them, when they found out that the President site president.gov.ge and other official sites were blocked. But as expert Gadi Evron said a couple of days after it started on his article Internet attacks against Georgian Websites:

1. There are botnet attacks against .ge websites.
2. These attacks affect the .ge Internet infrastructure, but it’s reachable.
3. It doesn’t seem Internet infrastructure is directly attacked.
4. Every other political tension in the past 10 years, from a comic of the Prophet Muhammad to the war in Iraq, were followed by online supporters attacking targets which seem affiliated with the opposing side, and vise-versa.

Blurring borders blog has a point on it:

A new type of narrative is taking hold among the coverage of the military conflict between Russia and Georgia. A number of sites are writing about the “cyberwarfare” being waged by pro-Russian forces against the Georgian government. It seems that, like Estonia a year ago, entities evoking the ire of Russia must be forced to combat widespread botnet-based DDoS attacks. I think there is little doubt that such occurrences will be increasingly part of real-world conflicts, but people are rushing into framing this as warfare, which will only lead to military-based reactions - something I fear.

A new, anonymous, ubiquitous enemy to fight was the picture by mainstream media. Warfare and hack attacks are frequently popular items, mostly because it’s a statement that almost always guarantees a reaction. And if it is combines with an armed conflict with Russia it will get additional attention. But it is important to take a second look on it.

“An army of ones and zeroes” was the title of an article by Eugeny Morozov, where he provides details on the attacks and all the information available to any user on the web interested in download the software and attack georgian sites. He tested it by himself and shared the experience:

Not knowing exactly how to sign up for a cyberwar, I started with an extensive survey of the Russian blogosphere. My first anonymous mentor, as I learned from this blog post, became frustrated with the complexity of other cyberwarfare techniques used in this campaign and developed a simpler and lighter “for dummies” alternative. All I needed to do was to save a copy of a certain Web page to my hard drive and then open it in my browser. I was warned that the page wouldn’t work with Internet Explorer but did well with Firefox and Opera. (Get with the program, Microsoft!) Once accessed, the page would load thumbnailed versions of a dozen key Georgian Web sites in a single window. All I had to do was set the page to automatically update every three to five seconds. Voilà: My browser was now sending thousands of queries to the most important Georgian sites, helping to overload them, and it had taken me only two to three minutes to set up.

Ethan Zuckrman provides a complete analysis of what he called “Misunderstanding Cyberwar“:

The rhetoric of “cyberwarfare” has a reassuring implication: we understand how to fight wars, so surely we can win a cyberwar. Unfortunately, the truth is more complicated. There’s no magic “cyberspace command” solution the USAF can unleash to defeat a botnet. The administrators trying to bring Georgian webservers back online are doing precisely what any sysadmin does confronted with a DDoS - they are blocking traffic from the IP addresses that are launching the attacks, and sharing these blocklists with administrators confronting the same problems. If they can block addresses more quickly than the attackers can recruit more participants, they’ll win. This strategy is known by the complex technical term “Whack-a-Mole”, and it’s roughly as frustrating as the fairground game of the same name.

Sometimes hacker world is unfamiliar for many of Internet users, even more complex for those that never use the internet (most of the World population). In Georgia, for example, only 7% of the population have access. But certainly almost all the population have access to t.v. and radio news that were repeating the same message: Internet in Georgia under attack, linked to the intervention.

Digital Natives Blog provides an analysis on the attacks on “Cyberwar and Non State Actors” and also discussed the importance of “digital citizenship”:

After the first headlines some experts said that it might be a grassroots global reaction, a protest, an electronic riot. But the first headlines raised concerns on the security divisions around the world, Cyberwar is a strong word with heavy political consequences all around that can shape the future of security measures and intervention of the Internet.

Now the debate among experts monitoring the situation such as Info War Monitor is:

were the attacks in cyberspace part of deliberately planned campaign, or did they happen spontaneously, inspired by events?

For hacktivists code is a form of speech, and their actions from grassroots are an expression of civil disobedience, an effective way to be heard, so their message will not be lost, their way to engage in political participation, to make political statements, something not analyzed in the first headlines by the press. And their hacks are political expressions, not hurting human beings but systems. Of concern of activist and hacktivists has to be the impact of information, misinformation and lack of information during humanitarian crisis.
People might react in different ways to a headline, and public opinion (lacking technology knowledge) can support in the future strong measures to control the Internet if media is not careful enough and pictures attacks are serious threats to global security. It might have an ugly impact to consider hacker actions an “act of aggression”, a “crime against peace”.

And at the end of the day, as as “The Wars virtual dimension” said:

while the political and informational wars are taking place, over there - in South Ossetia, in Georgia - people are dying and suffering. […].

Perhaps it is time to start thinking about internet tools to help those in the middle, as good net citizens and show media and public opinion the huge potential of Internet to do good.

This is the second instance of a popular video-sharing website being blocked in Turkey. YouTube was blocked on and off over videos deemed insulting to the country’s founding father, Kemal Atatürk.

A similar situation is found in Tunisia where both video-sharing websites, Dailymotion and Youtube, are made inaccessible.

According to Kuwaiti Arab Times:

Hamed Al-Othman says in an interview with Al-Qabas daily published Sunday he has prepared a bill that criminalizes promoting vice, incitement against the country’s leadership, divulging state secrets, or insulting Islam on the Web. If convicted, offenders would be sentenced to up to one year in jail and/or a fine, but face seven years in prison if their victims are minors.

Kuwait’s bloggers are unhappy with what they see as new restrictions against freedom of expression.

Blogger Forzaq8 warns that two clauses in the draft law are likely to “throw most internet users in jail.” He says the first deals with the unlawful use of the Internet and the second with unlawful distribution of research and literary work.

“going to setup my bag for couple of prison terms,” jokes the blogger.

Writing in Arabic, As you like posts a few useful tips for bloggers to protect themselves from the impending law. He says:

Blogger Muwathaf is also incensed by the new guidelines. He writes:

Another blogger, Krakatoa notes that the new draft is unclear and needs explanation. He points:

White Wings from is there light presents a number of scenarios such as the following:

Volunteers at his well-known website 64Tianwang.com (English) have been actively posting all news coverage and details surrounding Huang’s case, but the campaign to have his charges dropped gained a lot more momentum when, following his formal arrest on Friday afternoon, three of China’s better-known social issue bloggers, all from Sichuan, Wang Yi, Ran Yunfei and Linghu Buchong*, joined up with two other intellectual-writers, Liao Yiwu and Li Yadong, to take the brave step of issuing a letter of protest. The letter has been posted not just on their own blogs, but also on the more mainstream My1510, IndyMediaCN, among many others.

A translation of the letter, the original of which has since been read and spread widely online, can be seen below. Of particular note, however, is the online support yet another highly-read blogger, Mo Zhixu, has been providing on his own and in his own way, centered around his blog at independent portal Bullog.cn.

In early June, he posted the content of Huang’s Chinese Wikipedia entry, which at the time had far more information than its English counterpart, in a post at Bullog which although has since been deleted, can still be found elsewhere.

In a June 15 post titled simply, ‘One less person on MSN’, Mo reposts a Chinese-language RFA news report with the details of Huang’s arrest and earthquake relief/writing activities in the few days prior. On June 17 he posted a picture of the official document first used to detain Huang nearly a week earlier on June 11, along with the legal definition of what constitutes “possession of a state secret” in China:

Then on Saturday, July 19, Mo returned to Huang’s case with a picture and transcription of the official notice of Huang’s formal arrest, addressed to Huang’s mother, a post which in just a few hours had received over 11,000 hits and many supportive and outraged comments:

Below is the text of Wang, Ran, Linghu, Liao and Li’s statement on Huang’s arrest:

To Chengdu City Police, government, NPC representatives and the general public

On July 19, 2008 while at a friend’s party, we learned that Mr. Huang Qi, who since June 10 has been criminally detained by Chengdu Police, as of this afternoon, was formally arrested for the crime of “illegal possession of state secrets”.

While we have never been acquainted with Huang Qi, we respect the “Tianwang” which he founded to devote himself to upholding the rights of citizens. We know that he has served jail time, that he was mistreated while in prison, and that he came out with pains in his chest and other lingering conditions. Out of respect for him, we maintain our firm support for his civil rights-upholding activities through “Tianwang”, particularly his efforts in helping Mother Tang, relative of a June 4 victim, fight for compensation from the government.
As several Sichuanese intellectuals who experienced the earthquake, we especially respect Mr. Huang Qi for his participation in the civil society relief effort work following the earthquake. We know that he did everything in his power to provide supplies and aid to the earthquake victims in the disaster area, and was in contact with the parents of children who perished in the earthquake.

But what we really don’t understand is what a common citizen’s participation in disaster relief and understanding of the true situation in the disaster zone have to do with “state secrets”. We have also, as common citizens, taken part in some of the disaster zone relief work. We’re no different from Mr. Huang Qi, or any of the thousands of civil volunteers who went to the disaster zone, and in being there came to learn some unofficial information, or news which differed from what was reported in the media. So is any information that a citizen receives via means other than the media then supposed to be a “national secret”? Or does the state now naturally have ownership over all societal information? So is any citizen fortunate (or unfortunate) enough to see or hear any information inconsistent with government talking points then in “illegal possession of state secrets”?

If that is the case, then that would suggest that every single earthquake victim who spoke with Huang Qi is also in illegal possession of state secrets. Put another way, at the same time they became earthquake victims, they also became “state secrets”, or began carrying some sort of state secret virus. The Chengdu and Sichuan police should go arrest every single earthquake victim who came in contact with Huang Qi, and not only just Huang Qi himself. Or at least, all earthquake victims should be put in isolation, to keep any of us from speaking to them, and coming across any state secrets.

Given the common sense of rule of law, we know that all so-called state secrets, first off, are not known to average citizens. Second, the state takes measures to keep them confidential. In other words, anything that can be seen on the street, is not a secret. If nudity were to be seen on the street, the problem would certainly not be the people who saw it, but the person who was seen. Which is to say, any common citizen not part of any state organ, unless he were to use illegal means to pry into or steal information given prior protection by any state organ, any information of which he is aware, could not possibly touch up on the crime of “illegal possession of state secrets”.

As such, we have no choice but to express our strong suspicion, opposition and protest to Chengu police’s arrest of Huang Qi under the false pretense of his participation in post-earthquake disaster relief. Although we have seen that the local government was not happy to see volunteer-based civil society relief rescue efforts, the Chengdu police’s arrest of Huang Qi is all the more shocking. We can only understand this as a sort of negation of municipal society, a cruel and arrogant provocation aimed at civil society, as well as a humiliation to this province which only just suffered an earthquake.

Based on experience and conscience, we do not believe this to be a just arrest. We do hope that Chengdu police will be able to respect the rule of law and respect civic rights, at the same time, respecting their own methods used in handling a case. We advocate for and support the media, internet and civil society to be able to freely report and comment upon this case. Even more, we encourage intellectuals, urban residents and media in Chengdu and elsewhere to stand up and question and criticize the Chengdu police for this, using the legitimate means of a citizen to help the government in respecting the laws it itself established.

We call upon the Chengdu police that they not use any torture tactics to extort a confession or any other such barbaric means which violate the rule of law. We call upon the Chengdu police to allow Mr. Huang Qi to meet with his attorney. We call upon the Chengdu police to refrain from using illegal methods to continue to harass and threaten Huang Qi’s volunteers at Tianwang.

We would hate to see this case become yet another dismal human rights record raising international attention in the midst of this Olympic year. We regret to suspect, however, that the Chengdu police are at present committed to doing as much. As intellectuals of China, we also hate to see China’s human rights situation always being criticized by people from other countries, which is why we can only be hard-headed about this, and begin first and foremost by criticizing our own government.

We hope the Chengdu police and Chengdu judicial departments take the initiative in their response to this case. May our criticism, protest and response to the government prove to be a blessing for Chengdu, and for China.

2008-7-19
July 19, 2008

Just a brief description of Huang’s website Tianwang: put online in 1998 as a platform for reuniting families with missing persons, a year later it had expanded its focus to larger social issues, exposing several corruption cases and one major medical scandal, during which time Huang Qi was beaten while his website garnered heavy praise in commercial and official Chinese (as well as foreign) media. Less than two years later, the website was shut down. Two weeks after that, Huang Qi had it up and running again, this time hosted overseas, only then to be blocked within China as it remains today. That same summer, Huang Qi was sentenced to five years in prison for subversion of state power. All this and more can be read on Tianwang here.

*Linghu Buchong has informed GVA that while he in fact did not sign his name to the letter, he was the first person to have posted it to Bullog.

At the end of our first day of open work, GV founder Rebecca MacKinnon put an important idea on the table: censorship is not only a political or technological problem; it is also a social problem. Thus, it is important to encourage bloggers to resist; to keep blogging. In this last task, the NGOs are one of the most valuable resources for bloggers who need help to keep blogging actively for their causes. The main question for the session was how NGOs can help more effectively.

Elijah Zarwan, from Human Rights Watch pointed out some of the tasks an NGO must follow in order to efficiently help people in need. Taking his experience in Egypt as a start, and quoting certain Egyptian bloggers, he made clear that an NGO must inform people about their rights and train them to communicate, encourage local support, and connect with people around the world. These bloggers also underlined the importance of spreading the word about the abuses taking place in Egypt.

Thus, as an NGO, to help repressed activists is a matter of commitment. NGOs and activists should work together instead of working for each other. They need to listen carefully, and listen to the right people: there should also be contact with people that don’t speak English and who live outside the big cities. NGOs should also support activists, work on prevention, try to find allies inside the government and respond as quickly as possible.

Internet has changed a lot the problems surrounding freedom of expression in many ways. As more people become authors, activists, and information sources; there are more voices to be heard and to be protected. According to Clothilde Le Coz, from Reporters Without Borders, a new space for advocacy for journalists has opened with Internet activism. This NGO specializes in putting pressure on governments in order to make sure they comply with the commitments taken. For them, blogger participation is the main source of information. Without them, their work would become fiercely difficult. They strongly advise bloggers to work on prevention and not wait until censorship affects them directly to fight against.

Nasser Weddady gave interesting examples of how bloggers and NGOs have worked together in order to make people aware of censorship situations happening in countries apparently far away. He illustrated with the example of Jane Novak, who carried important work as an activist against the Yemeni government from her home. The main question for this activist defender was “why should we care?” and underlined, apart from the need of defending Human Rights in any country of the world, the importance of connections among governments and how putting pressure on the authorities of the West can be helpful for activists in the East.

The NGO Tactical Tech, represented by Stephanie Hankey presented the tools they use to help activists through technology in order to remain anonymous. Also, they work with marginalized communities in order to make them aware of their rights and to communicate safely. So far, they have trained 1500 advocates and independent journalists. One of the most important tasks is based on information, especially in what it comes to the advantages and disadvantages of this kind of activist, in order to help people to take their own decisions. They put the light on the hidden challenge of blogging anonymously.

Finally, Antony Loewenstein made an interesting summary on censorship in countries such as his native Australia, a place in which censorship takes another shape. Who are the ones to decide what is convenient or not in the Web? This points out the problems that are merging when society and Internet users decide to censor the content on the Internet. He focused on the current Australian situation and in the Asia Pacific region and how NGOs can efficiently protect online activists and analyzed the prejudices and preconceptions in the West around repressive goverments. “I’ve long believed that activism must be mainstreamed to be truly effective, rather than just the concern of a minority. Our job as journalists, activists, NGOs, bloggers or concerned citizens is to bring the stories of the world to a media that welcomes localism and shuns complexity. These rules of the game are ripe for change.” At the end, it was clear that one of the main goals for the future of blogger activism will be to find a way to work together and eliminate the dichotomy that separates us, in an absurd way, as Easterners or Westerners.

Here is a rough translation of the comment:

I hate cops [menty], [swear word omitted]

I don’t agree with the thesis that “policemen still have the mentality of a repressive stick in the hands of the powers that be.” First, they are cops [menty, not militsionery, a less respectful way to refer to police]. Second, their mentality isn’t still here. It’s simply ineradicable. Once a musor [a synonym for ment; non-slang meaning of the word is "trash"], always a musor, even in Africa. Those who become cops [menty] - rednecks and thugs - are the dumbest and least educated representatives of the live/animal world. Would be great if there was an oven, similar to those in Auschwitz, in the center of every Russian city, at the main square (in Syktyvkar, right in the center of Stefanovskaya, where the New Year’s tree stands, so that everyone could see), and there’d be a daily ceremony - or, even better, twice a day (at noon and midnight, for example) - of burning a dishonest cop [ment] there. The people would be doing the burning. This would be the first step towards cleansing the society of the dirt that the thuggish cops are.

The court found Terentyev guilty of inciting enmity and publicly humiliating representatives of a social group (Article 282, part 1 of the Russian Federation’s Criminal Code).

Here is a rough translation of a tiny part of the 12-page “guilty” verdict (RUS), posted by one of the defense witnesses, LJ user mezak, on his blog (the original of the passage below is on p. 11; the post also has photos of Terentyev, his defense team, and the judge reading the verdict; there are 376 comments to the post so far):

[...] Defendant Terentyev S.S. [Savva Sergeyevich], by means of the language, by having a negative impact on the public opinion and mood, and by aiming to incite social enmity and hatred, to escalate social conflict, to sharpen social contradictions, to awaken base instincts in people, contrasted the people and police officers, calling to [their] physical annihilation by the people. The text does not allow for ambiguous understanding and interpretation of [its] content and meaning, because it should be understandable to any average native speaker of Russian who has basic oral and written language skills. [...]

LJ user sholademi re-posted the verdict on his blog and added this note (RUS) at the end of his entry:

Hmm, it has to be noted that the court’s verdict contains many orthographic mistakes. This, in addition to the legal side of the case (namely, the questionable linguistic analysis). In short, it’s getting crazier and crazier.

In another post, LJ user sholademi posted a 5-question survey (RUS), explaining that Terentyev’s defense team was planning to appeal the blogger’s sentence and, among other things, would like to “find out how Savva Terentyev’s case is going to affect the discussion environment in the Russian blogosphere.” Below are the survey’s results so far:

1. Before Savva Terentyev’s case, were there many LJ bloggers who allowed themselves to speak harshly of law enforcement and other state institutions and officials?

a. Many bloggers made such statements - 842 (75.4%)

b. Only some bloggers made such statements - 233 (20.9%)

c. I’ve never encountered such statements on blogs - 41 (3.7%)

2. Before the verdict on Savva Terentyev’s case, how often did you encounter harsh statements about law enforcement and other state institutions and officials on your friends feed?

а. Such statements were pretty frequent on my friends feed - 664 (59.7%)

b. Such statements were pretty rare on my friends feed - 347 (31.2%)

c. Such statements were never present on my friends feed - 102 (9.2%)

3. If the verdict on Savva Terentyev’s case comes into force, how will it affect the number of bloggers who would allow themselves to make harsh statements about law enforcement and other state institutions and officials in open posts and comments?

a. Their numbers will grow significantly - 193 (17.4%)

b. Their numbers will grow, but not significantly - 239 (21.6%)

c. Their numbers will decrease, but not significantly - 550 (49.6%)

d. Their numbers will decrease significantly - 126 (11.4%)

4. If the verdict on Savva Terentyev’s case comes into force, how will it affect the number of bloggers who would allow themselves to make harsh statements about law enforcement and other state institutions and officials in locked (friends-only) posts?

a. Their numbers will grow significantly - 386 (34.9%)

b. Their numbers will grow, but not significantly - 470 (42.5%)

c. Their numbers will decrease, but not significantly - 219 (19.8%)

d. Their numbers will decrease significantly - 31 (2.8%)

5. Do you consider Savva Terentyev’s sentence fair?

a. I consider it fair - 73 (6.5%)

b. I consider it unfair, as it is too soft - 12 (1.1%)

c. I consider it unfair, as it is too harsh - 71 (6.3%)

d. I consider it unfair in principle, because, in my opinion, Savva did not commit a crime - 963 (86.1%)

On July 14, Savva Terentyev and his lawyer held a press conference in Moscow (see photo of Terentyev at LJ user mezak’s blog). LJ user dolboeb - Anton Nossik, the self-described “Social Media Evangelist at SUP,” the online media company that owns LiveJournal.com - announced the event on his blog and added this note (RUS) at the end of his post:

[...] Each month, 10-12 million comments appear in the Cyrillic LJ (10.5 million in June, 130.5 million in the past 12 months). On the average, every post gets 3.7 comments. [The police unit that initiated Savva Terentyev's case] has plenty of work ahead (unless, of course, they’ve got nothing else to busy themselves with).

At the press conference, LJ user dolboeb reiterated his point (RUS, link to an article in Novaya Gazeta, the newspaper for which Anna Politkovskaya used to write):

[...] Of course, spending 15 minutes on the web and finding a criminal is a lot more convenient than running around the dark, narrow streets with a gun. As a taxpayer, I’m not satisfied with this situation. [...]

Following the bombing, police interrogated a number of Belarusian opposition members and human rights activists and searched their homes and offices. On July 9, four people were detained: Sergei Chislov, Igor Korsak, Viktor Leshchinsky and Miroslav Lozovsky, all members of the White Legion, the youth wing of the Belarusian Union of Military Personnel, banned in 1996.

Andrei Khrapavitsky of the recently re-launched Belarusan American Blog has written (ENG) about the blast and the subsequent arrests - as well as about the Belarusian bloggers’ response:

[...] I guess there’s hardly a blogger in Belarus who hasn’t commented on the bomb blast. People are guessing what happened and what consequences it would have. There are lots of different versions, but I doubt there is much sense to recapitulate them here. One is for sure. This is the first major terror act in Belarus. Even if the regime itself is not involved (and most probably, it isn’t as many prominent analysts, like Silitski and Feduta, think), there’s a damn good pretense to use this bomb blast for intimidation of the opposition. The blast is especially handy for this matter, as it happened a few days after the parliamentary race had officially started in Belarus.

LJ user kabierac posted Martin Niemöller’s poem “First they came…” on his blog and called Belarusian fellow-bloggers to use the emblem of the White Legion as their userpic image, to express solidarity with the four individuals detained in connection with July 4 blast. His post (BEL, RUS) has made it into the Top 30 of the Yandex Blogs portal.

Many Belarusian bloggers have supported the initiative. LJ user coipish is one of them; according to some reports (BEL), he has also been detained by the police. He wrote this (BEL, RUS):

What you see on my userpic now is the emblem of what used to be the White Legion, whose former members are now being blamed for the recent blast. I join the initiative to support them by at least changing my userpic. I really sympathize with all the victims of the terrorist act, but, unfortunately, the real perpetrators are not likely to be ever held responsible for it :((

LJ user z_hunter chose to use an alternative userpic image - with the same symbol but a different color scheme:

Here is why (a discussion in the comments section on LJ user coipish’s post):

z_hunter:

A good emblem, but the colors are bad. Not our colors - black and red. I like the white-red-white variation better.

kostas14:

Traditional for the Belarusian culture and art. [...]

z_hunter:

That’s right. But red flag is also associated with some not very good periods in the history of the USSR and Germany. And all this had a very destructive and sad effect on our Belarus.

As for the reactions of the relatively apolitical Minsk residents, Kartina Mira (”Picture of the World”) blog, run by a Belarus-based Russian citizen, has this sketch (RUS), featuring a conversation overheard at one of the city’s hairdressing salons:

[...]

- Oh, have you heard about the blast? A real terrorist act…
- Yes. Chechnya is way over there, and we are here. They are totally getting out of control.

That is, these events are so unnatural for Belarus that ordinary people come up with only one direct association for the blast: “terrorist act - Chechnya.”

The realities of the country I live in. Quiet, peaceful, nice, stable. Sometimes even boring. But it’s so much better than what the neighbors have.