Centre for Law and Democracy

Over the past three years, delegates from 12 countries representing 800 million people and 40% of the global economy have been secretly negotiating a sweeping trade agreement known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). Since their inception, the TPP negotiations have been widely criticised for their lack of transparency and failure to involve non-State players, including civil society. This criticism has been fuelled, in part, by suspicions that the treaty will pose a threat to freedom of expression by expanding copyright rules to the detriment of the public interest in protected works entering the public domain and being available for legitimate reuses, and by establishing harsh new measures aimed at combating copyright infringement.

On Wednesday, a leak of the draft chapter on Intellectual Property Rights released by Wikileaks appeared to confirm many of these fears. The Centre for Law and Democracy (CLD) intends to prepare a full Analysis of the leaked text shortly, but our preliminary examination finds several glaring problems. One provision commits States Parties to extend copyright protection terms for works authored by natural persons to either 70 or 100 years after the death of the author. 70 years would be a significant extension in New Zealand, Canada, Malaysia, Japan, Vietnam and Brunei, while 100 years would mean extensions in every State except Mexico. CLD believes that it is completely inappropriate to extend the term of protection and, indeed, that existing terms are already far too long given the changes that have taken place in the information space since the Berne Convention was originally agreed (see Reconceptualising Copyright: Adapting the Rules to Respect Freedom of Expression in the Digital Age).

Click here to read the leaked TPP Chapter

Another provision would undermine the immunity from liability that Internet Service Providers (ISPs) enjoy in better practice States when their customers are found to be violating copyright online. This principle of safe harbour is a cornerstone of the Internet, without which many companies would be unable to operate. However, a majority of the States negotiating the TPP favour making this immunity dependent on ISPs’ participation in a programme to terminate Internet service provision to repeat copyright violators. CLD believes that termination schemes represent a breach of the right to freedom of expression (see Analysis of the Korean Copyright Act). They are certainly extremely controversial and vastly unpopular in the States that have attempted to introduce them.

The draft treaty also imposes significant legal restrictions on the ability of users to circumvent digital locks placed by copyright holders – specifically by criminalising the development and distribution of devices that are capable of circumventing the locks – ostensibly to prevent copyright infringement. Anti-circumvention laws are controversial, largely because digital locks often fail to distinguish between illegitimate and legitimate uses, such as the creation of transformative derivative works. While the text contemplates certain exceptions to the restrictions on circumventing digital locks, it is likely that these measures would limit the ability of individuals to engage in legitimate uses of copyrighted works.

Although appropriate protection for intellectual property rights is important, among other things to foster a rich expressive landscape, the overzealous anti-piracy measures that many States have sought to put in place in recent years represent one of the greatest threats to freedom of expression. If accurate, the leaked document reveals that the TPP negotiations are the latest such attempt. It is, at the same time, notable that the draft TPP also reveals that there are many substantial points of disagreement among the participating States, and that most of the problematic provisions face resistance from certain quarters.

The Centre for Law and Democracy believes that it is inappropriate for an important document like the TPP, which will have a significant impact on the Internet and creative content production, to be negotiated behind closed doors. While we recognise that officials need some space to discuss and negotiate, we call on participating States to make drafts public on a regular basis, to be open about their core positions on critical issues and to create forums which allow for the views of other stakeholders to be heard. It is vitally important that the final document strike an appropriate balance between the freedom of expression interests of authors and those of the wider public.

For further information, please contact:

Michael Karanicolas
Legal Officer
Centre for Law and Democracy
email: michael@law-democracy.org
tel: +1 902 448-5290
www.law-democracy.org
twitter: @law_democracy

The success or failure of a right to information regime is heavily dependent on the public officials who are tasked with implementation, and whether they are informed about their transparency obligations. Yesterday, as part of a wider project to support implementation of the Indonesian Law on Public Information Openness, the Centre for Law and Democracy (CLD) and the Indonesian Center for Environmental Law (ICEL) carried out a training for public officials in the Indonesian province of Banten. The training was attended by information officers (PPIDs) from over 40 different public bodies from across the province, as well as representatives from the Banten and Jakarta Information Commissions.

“Given the centrality of information officers to proper implementation of Indonesia’s right to informtion law, we are pleased so many of them were able to attend the training.” said Toby Mendel, Executive Director of CLD. “We hope that this training and others for officials we have done under this project will improve implementation of the law.”

The training is one of a number of interventions being carried out under this project. The programme also includes supply-side interventions, grassroots awareness-raising activities and the production of resource materials.

“Over the past year, there have been 427 complaints regarding information disclosure in Banten,” said Dessy Eko Prayitno, Researcher with ICEL. “By building capacity among the PPIDs, we hope to lower this number, and to enable Banten to become a leader in implementation of the RTI law”.

More information on the programme, as well as versions of the training manual in both English and Bahasa Indonesia and other resources, are available at: http://www.law-democracy.org/live/projects/rti-in-indonesia/.

For further information, please contact:

Michael Karanicolas
Legal Officer
Centre for Law and Democracy
info@law-democracy.org
+1 902 431-3688
www.law-democracy.org

Global right to information organisations Access Info Europe (AIE) and the Centre for Law and Democracy (CLD) today called on Open Government Partnership (OGP) Participating Countries to make serious commitments to strengthen their right to information laws in the next round of action plans, due to be presented in April 2014.

One of the biggest concerns at the London OGP summit is that governments are not making commitments which will move them beyond the current situation and that they are not being ambitious or “stretching” with planned reforms. This concern is particularly acute in relation to the right to information, one of the eligibility criteria for joining the OGP.

CLD and AIE will release a report shortly which highlights the fact that seven OGP members – namely Costa Rica, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Paraguay, Philippines, Spain and Tanzania – still do not have any law guaranteeing the right to information. Two of these are on the OGP Steering Committee, a position the Philippines has held since the beginning.
Another 13 have legal frameworks with scores in bottom of the global RTI Rating (www.rti-rating.org), i.e. scores of less than 75 points out of a possible total of 150.

“It is unacceptable for countries to sign up to a open government initiative which has transparency at its core and yet fail to put in place a proper legal framework to guarantee the right to information,” commented Toby Mendel, Executive Director of Centre for Law and Democracy. Mendel suggested that modern access laws should aim to score at least 100 points.

“With the RTI Rating we have identified precisely what countries need to do, we are calling for immediate commitments to strengthen access to information laws, bringing them up above the 100 points out of 150 level,” said Helen Darbishire, Executive Director of Access Info Europe.

For further information, please contact:

Toby Mendel
Centre for Law and Democracy
www.law-democracy.org
e-mail: toby@law-democracy.org
tel: +44 (0)7964 015083

The Government of Bhutan has posted a draft of the Right to Information Bill, 2013, for comment. The draft Bill sets out procedures and other rules to give practical effect to citizens’ right to access information held by public authorities, as guaranteed by Article 7(3) of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan. As part of a joint project with International Media Support, CLD has prepared Comments on the draft Bill based on the RTI Rating, a methodology for assessing the strength of legal frameworks for the right to information, developed by the Centre for Law and Democracy (CLD) and Access Info Europe. The RTI Bill measures up extremely well, garnering 125 points out of a possible total of 150. This score would place Bhutan in 5th place globally in terms of the legal framework for RTI, behind Serbia (135 points), India and Slovenia (each with 130 points) and Liberia (126 points). The Comments provide an assessment of the RTI Bill against international standards and better national practice, as reflected in the right to information laws of democracies around the world.

Click here to read the Comments

In the early hours of Monday morning, 7 October 2013, a group of masked men armed with machetes and iron bars stormed the offices of Raajje TV, an opposition-aligned television station in Male, torching the studio, and wounding and hospitalising a security guard. The television station had received written threats of an attack the previous day and had requested police protection, but had received no response.

This incident is the latest in a troubling deterioration in the security situation for the media and journalists in the Maldives. At least four journalists were attacked by police and protesters while covering demonstrations in July 2013. Several journalists were also attacked in February 2013, including Raajje TV’s head of news.

“Violence against journalists for their reporting is not an ordinary crime,” said CLD Executive Director Toby Mendel. “It is an attack on freedom of expression and hence on everyone and indeed democracy itself. It is very troubling that these journalists were unable to secure police protection, even after reporting a specific and credible threat.”

According to international human rights law, States are under an obligation to create an environment in which the media can do its job effectively. This includes, where necessary, providing protection for the physical security of journalists and media outlets. The Centre for Law and Democracy calls on the Maldivian authorities, and particularly the police, to enhance the protection that it offers to journalists with a view to preventing future violent incidents. The police should also fully investigate the assaults that have taken place with a view to prosecuting those responsible, among other things to avoid the emergence of a climate of impunity for attacks against the media.

For further information, please contact:

Michael Karanicolas
Legal Officer
Centre for Law and Democracy
email: michael@law-democracy.org
tel: +1 902 448-5290
www.law-democracy.org
twitter: @law_democracy

On 23 September 2013, the Centre for Law and Democracy (CLD) released a detailed Analysis of the weaknesses in Nova Scotia’s access to information framework which included a number of recommendations for reform. In response, the leaders of all three major parties expressed some willingness to consider CLD’s recommendations. To measure the true strength of the parties’ commitment to transparency, CLD called on them to make the following three specific commitments:

1. If elected Premier, I will expand the powers and mandate of the Review Officer, particularly through granting her order-making power.
2. If elected Premier, I will impose a binding timeline of 30 days, extendable once by a maximum of 30 days, for responding to access to information requests.
3. If elected Premier, in our dealings with government lawyers, my government will only claim solicitor-client privilege in cases where confidentiality is necessary to protect an impending court case or negotiation.

We are pleased to announce that both the Liberal and Progressive Conservative campaigns have unequivocally accepted all three recommendations and pledged to fulfil these promises if they win the election. The New Democratic Party, on the other hand, rejected all three, arguing, against all the evidence, that there was no need for these reforms.

Access to information is a human right, protected both under international law and in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and an indispensable tool in promoting accountable, participatory government. As a non-partisan human rights organisation, CLD takes no position on the outcome of the election. But we do call on all parties to promote the right of access, and to respect their commitments on this issue. For our part, we will be happy to work with the next government to improve openness in Nova Scotia.

Click here to read the response from the Progressive Conservative Campaign
Click here to read the response from the Liberal Campaign
Click here to read the response from the New Democratic Campaign

CLD has also prepared a response to the objections raised by the New Democratic Campaign to our reform proposals: Click here to read the Letter

For further information, please contact:

Michael Karanicolas
Legal Officer
Centre for Law and Democracy
email: michael@law-democracy.org
tel: +1 902 448-5290
www.law-democracy.org
twitter: @law_democracy

The Green Climate Fund (GCF), an international financial institution (IFI) which uses lending to promote compliance with the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), has prepared a draft policy on information disclosure for consideration by the Board at its fifth meeting in Paris from 8-10 October 2013. The Global Transparency Initiative (GTI) has prepared a Note analysing the draft policy.

Click here to read the Note

“We very much welcome the fact that the GCF is moving forward quickly to put in place an interim policy on openness,” said CLD Executive Director, Toby Mendel. “However, the regime of exceptions to the right of access is far too broad, while the rules for processing requests are very weak and need to be strengthened.”

The focus of the current draft policy is very much on proactive disclosure of information, which takes up 26 of its 36 operative paragraphs. In contrast, only three paragraphs, containing three limited rules, are devoted to processing requests, and only one paragraph is devoted, respectively, to exceptions and appeals.

The key recommendations in the Note are:
• The regime of exceptions is too broad and too many exceptions are not harm-tested.
• The procedures for lodging and responding to requests should be substantially expanded to address important issues such as what needs to be included in a request, the time limits for responding to requests and providing assistance to requesters.
• The policy should make it clear that appeals will be decided by a panel which includes representatives who are independent of the GCF.

We recognise that this is just an interim policy, but we believe it would be unfortunate to set a negative precedent regarding exceptions and would take little effort to improve the section on procedures. We urge the Board of the GCF to adopt a draft policy which will serve as a strong basis for openness during the interim period.

For further information, please contact:

Toby Mendel
Executive Director
Centre for Law and Democracy
Email: toby@law-democracy.org
Tel: +1 902 431-3688
www.law-democracy.org
Twitter: @law_democracy

For years, politicians across Canada have been promising transparent and accountable government, and failing to deliver. From Canada’s lukewarm participation in the Open Government Partnership to the many failed attempts at reforming the federal Access to Information Act, Canadians have become used to a familiar cycle, where candidates pledge bold improvements during the election campaign, only to backslide on these commitments after the election is over.

Here in Nova Scotia, there is ample evidence of a deficit in public accountability. The clearest manifestation of this problem came in 2010, when Auditor General Jacques Lapointe released a report that revealed widespread abuse of MLA expenses by members of all three major political parties. The revelations led to criminal charges being laid against four serving and former MLAs. Although steps have been taken to tighten spending rules, there is no indication that any progress has been made in tackling the underlying problems at the heart of the matter. The Management Commission, which was created in the aftermath of the scandal, may work to prevent fraudulent expenses claims going forward but it will not change the overall political climate under which so many MLAs felt comfortable abusing the system. This requires fostering a broader climate of accountability within government. A key step along that road is an effective right to information for Nova Scotians.

On 23 September 2013, Centre for Law and Democracy released an Analysis of the weaknesses in Nova Scotia’s right to information framework, and recommended root and branch reform of the province’s Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FOIPOP), including 18 major changes to bring the FOIPOP more closely into line with international standards.

In response to the Analysis, the leaders of all three major parties expressed a willingness to consider the recommendations. Liberal Leader Stephen McNeil stated that he would review the FOIPOP with the aim of making Nova Scotia “the most open and transparent province in Canada.” New Democratic Party Leader Darrell Dexter claimed he would be “happy to consider” any “constructive suggestions” in the Analysis. Progressive Conservative Leader Jamie Baillie also expressed support for the Analysis’ recommendations.

While it is good to hear that all three candidates for Premier endorse the need for greater transparency in government, all three expressed their support in somewhat vague terms. Experience suggests that broad promises made during the course of a campaign are often forgotten once a party is in power. In order to ensure that the candidates will follow through on their commitments, we have boiled our recommendations down to three core ideas, which we call on all three candidates to include as part of their platforms:

1. If elected Premier, I will expand the powers and mandate of the Review Officer, particularly through granting her order-making power.

2. If elected Premier, I will impose a binding timeline of 30 days, extendable once by a maximum of 30 days, for responding to access to information requests.

3. If elected Premier, in our dealings with government lawyers, my government will only claim solicitor-client privilege in cases where confidentiality is necessary to protect an impending court case or negotiation.

None of these three ideas are particularly radical. For example, oversight bodies in Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario, Prince Edward Island and Quebec all have the power to issue legally binding orders. In India, a country which has thirty times Canada’s population, and where the public sector has far less access to advanced data management technology, the Right to Information Act, 2005 requires government officials to respond to requests within 30 days with no possibility of an extension.

By endorsing these three promises, Nova Scotia’s leadership candidates can show that they are serious about improving transparency in the province. The trust deficit between Nova Scotia’s voters and its elected officials has never been higher. It is time to put in a place a system with real accountability.

For further information, please contact:

Michael Karanicolas
Legal Officer
Centre for Law and Democracy
email: michael@law-democracy.org
tel: +1 902 448-5290
www.law-democracy.org
twitter: @law_democracy

Access Info Europe (Spain) and the Centre for Law and Democracy (Canada) are today launching a report providing an analysis of the results and trends in the global RTI Rating, which assesses the legal framework for the right to information (RTI) in every country in the world which has adopted a national RTI law. A major finding of the report is that as international standards have developed laws have got stronger. At the same time, there is still a lot of room for improvement, with only 23 countries scoring more than 100 points.

Click here to read the Report

“Our report shows that RTI laws have steadily improved over time, with the average score climbing from just 78 out of a possible total of 150 in 1995 to an average of 91 for the laws adopted since 2010,” said Toby Mendel, Executive Director of the Centre for Law and Democracy. “This is probably due partly to the fact that later laws can build on the experience of earlier laws, and partly to the fact that there are now stronger and clearer international standards on this key issue.”

One finding of the report is that some of the world’s weakest laws are in the older democracies of Europe. Austria is bottom with 37 points out of 150 points, Germany just scored 52 points and Italy 57 points. Spain has no law and its current draft has scored a very low 68 points.

Helen Darbishire, Executive Director of Access Info Europe, commented: “It’s clear that now that access to information is recognised as a fundamental right, we are getting stronger laws. We call on countries lower in the rating such as Austria, Germany and Italy urgently to improve their laws, and those in the process of adopting new laws, such as Spain, should aim for a high score.”

For further information, please contact:

Toby Mendel
Executive Director
Centre for Law and Democracy
Email: toby@law-democracy.org
Tel: +1 902 412 0872
www.law-democracy.org
Twitter: @law_democracy

As Nova Scotians prepare to select their next government, transparency and a positive attitude toward the right to information should be a significant consideration in determining who is best suited to lead the province. Today, the Centre for Law and Democracy (CLD) released an Analysis pointing to major problems with Nova Scotia’s transparency framework, the Freedom of Information and Protection and Privacy Act (FOIPOP). The Analysis notes that the FOIPOP is significantly weaker than transparency legislation found in many developing countries, including India, South Africa and Mexico, and proposes concrete legislative solutions to bring the framework up to code.

Click here to read the Analysis

“The reforms we are proposing may seem extensive, but they are the bare minimum required to bring the FOIPOP into line with international standards,” said CLD Executive Director Toby Mendel. “Nova Scotia was once in the vanguard on this issue, adopting the first law in Canada, but it has now fallen sadly behind while international standards have moved steadily forwards.”

The major proposed reforms include:
• The Review Officer should have the power to make binding orders, and an expanded mandate including investigative powers.
• Timeline extensions for response should be capped at 30 days.
• Unnecessary and overly broad exceptions should be removed or revised.
• The rules on release of information in the public interest should be strengthened.

The evidence that the access to information law is weak is strong. From expense scandals to obfuscation around the provincial government’s business dealings, there is a clear need to enhance openness in government. CLD has long been an advocate for root-and-branch reform of access to information legislation across Canada. In the context of the upcoming provincial election, CLD urges the competing parties to include commitments in their platforms to improve Nova Scotia’s right to information law.

For further information, please contact:

Michael Karanicolas
Legal Officer
Centre for Law and Democracy
email: michael@law-democracy.org
tel: +1 902 448-5290
www.law-democracy.org
twitter: @law_democracy

The Open Government Partnership (OGP) is a global initiative to promote greater transparency, participation and accountability in government founded by Presidents Obama of the United States and Rousseff of Brazil. Member countries must meet minimum openness standards and pledge to make further commitments to openness. Having presented its first Action Plan in April 2012, setting out the key actions it will undertake to promote open government, Canada’s government is now preparing an implementation report on the Action Plan for formal review by the OGP. The Centre for Law and Democracy has submitted a Progress Report as part of this process.

Click here to read the Assessment

“We very much welcome Canada’s active participation in the OGP and the fact that it has largely delivered on its Action Plan commitments,” said CLD Executive Director, Toby Mendel. “However, the process of consultation around the development and implementation of the Action Plan was weak, and the specific commitments can only be described as modest.”

OGP Members pledge to consult widely with local stakeholders to develop action plans which set out the specific actions they propose to undertake. The process of consultation on Canada’s Action Plan was limited, involving an online commenting process, a Twitter town hall and one meeting of the Advisory Panel, a multi-stakeholder body set up by the government. At no point in the consultations did the government publish a draft Plan for comment.

In terms of substance, the Action Plan contains 12 specific commitments, and the government has largely moved forward to implement them in line with the timetable it set for itself. However, the commitments are modest, with a strong focus on technology and posting more information online, and relatively relaxed time lines for implementation. Importantly, the Plan fails to make a commitment to reform the Access to Information Act, despite the fact almost all informed observers agree this is a key priority.

CLD calls on the government to undertake robust consultations as it develops its implementation report to the OGP and again when it develops its second action plan, due in March 2014. We also call on the government to ensure that the second action plan is far more ambitious than the current one.

For further information, please contact:

Toby Mendel
Executive Director
Centre for Law and Democracy
Email: toby@law-democracy.org
Tel: +1 902 412 0872
www.law-democracy.org
Twitter: @law_democracy

The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) and the Centre for Law and Democracy (CLD) today launched the Handbook on International Standards and Media Law in the Arab World.

The Handbook sets out international standards regarding media freedom and assesses the extent to which the legal regimes governing the media in Arab countries conform to those standards. It is designed to support journalists and others in the Arab world in their struggle for press freedom and media law reform in the region.

Click here for the Handbook in English
Click here for the Handbook in Arabic

The Handbook offers a unique overview of the laws and regulations governing the media in countries in the Arab world and spells out potential solutions to the challenges facing Arab journalists based on international standards. As the first detailed assessment of media laws across the region, the Handbook should prove to be a vital tool for journalists and others in their fight to bring about key media law reforms in the region, and thereby to confront threats from poverty, corruption and political interference.

“Arab journalists and their unions are confronting huge challenges arising from warring political factions, social conflicts and pressure for change,” said IFJ President Jim Boumelha. “Equipping them with a blue print for root-and-branch reforms of media laws and regulations is crucial in helping them build a new culture of journalism which would bring to an end offensive laws that continue to control information.”

The Handbook covers key media law issues, including media diversity, the need for bodies which regulate the media to be independent of political and commercial interference, regulatory standards in different media sectors – including journalists, the print and broadcast media and public broadcasting – the right to information, and criminal and civil restrictions on what may be published or broadcast.

“An assessment like this of the media law regimes across the Arab world is long overdue,” said Toby Mendel, Executive Director, Centre for Law and Democracy. “The Arab Spring has opened up new possibilities for democratic change, and we hope the Handbook will assist those advocating for reform in the region.”

For further information, please contact:

Toby Mendel
Executive Director
Centre for Law and Democracy
Email: toby@law-democracy.org
Tel: +1 902 412 0872
www.law-democracy.org
Twitter: @law_democracy

In recent years, freedom of expression in Russia has come under severe attack. A number of pieces of legislation have been adopted limiting the ability of opposition voices to make themselves heard. An Analysis released today by CLD demonstrates that, even against this troubling backdrop, the recent decision by Russia’s government to create an Internet blacklist is a particularly ominous development.

Click here to read the Analysis

“Although the Internet is famously resistant to censorship or control, Russia’s content regulation framework has tremendous potential to clamp down on online speech” said Toby Mendel, Executive Director of CLD. “We are particularly concerned about moves to ban speech that ‘propagandises non-traditional sexual relations’ which is clearly targeting the LGBT community.”

Key problems with Russia’s blacklist are that it imposes overly broad and illegitimate bans on content and that it lacks appropriate safeguards against political abuse. This problem is exacerbated by a lack of transparency in the way the system operates and insufficient procedural protections for those whose material is targeted for takedown.

In the period since the law has come into force, there is already ample evidence of its overbreadth, with several innocuous websites having been put on the blacklist. CLD calls upon the Russian government to review its whole approach to controlling Internet content, with a view to bringing the system into line with international standards regarding the right to freedom of expression.

For further information, please contact:

Michael Karanicolas
Legal Officer
Centre for Law and Democracy
email: michael@law-democracy.org
tel: +1 902 448-5290
www.law-democracy.org
twitter: @law_democracy

Copyright law is among the most contentious issues regarding freedom of expression today. Artists claim that rampant piracy is destroying their ability to earn a living, while audiences accustomed to the free-flowing digital age feel stifled by copyright’s limitations. Against this backdrop, major conflicts have taken place to prevent attempts by rights holding lobbies to pass draconian rules which would impose harsh sanctions – including jail terms and even cutting off Internet access – for copyright breaches.

Click here for the full Report

In a major Report released today, Reconceptualising Copyright: Adapting the Rules to Respect Freedom of Expression in the Digital Age, CLD examines the current copyright rules from the perspective of freedom of expression. The Report finds that the rules signally fail to respect basic freedom of expression standards and proposes dramatic changes to bring copyright into line with its core purpose of promoting expression.

“Despite all of the rhetoric, there have been few attempts to conduct a rigorous analysis of copyright from the perspective of freedom of expression,” said Toby Mendel, Executive Director of CLD. “We are proposing some major changes to the current regime to provide for an appropriate balance between the need for authors to earn a living and to bring the rules into line with the needs of the digital age in which we live.”

Key recommendations made in the Report include:
• A clear distinction needs to be made between author’s moral rights and the economic protection afforded by copyright law.
• Economic copyright protection should apply only where authors specifically assert it and where it is necessary to incentivise creation.
• The duration of economic copyright protection should be significantly reduced and should be based on market conditions rather than the life of the author.
• Creative derivative uses of existing works should benefit from broad protection.
• Sanctions for copyright infringement should not include loss of access to the Internet and criminal sanctions should be limited to commercial-scale breaches.

For further information, please contact:

Michael Karanicolas
Legal Officer
Centre for Law and Democracy
email: michael@law-democracy.org
tel: +1 902 448-5290
www.law-democracy.org
twitter: @law_democracy

Today, the Freedom of Information Advocates Network (FOIAnet) launched a major global analysis of the development of the right to information (RTI) movement, broken down by region. The publication follows FOIAnet’s celebration of its 10th anniversary on International Right to Know Day, 28 September 2012.

The Update, which was co-authored by different human rights advocates for each of the seven regions it covers, presents the very different challenges, developments and experiences of civil society advocates for RTI in each region of the world. The Update also describes the key struggles that have taken place in each region, successes and failures, and lessons learned, along with a selection of case studies that illustrate how RTI has been promoted within each region.

Click Here to Read the Analysis

“This is the very first time FOIAnet has produced a major publication,” said Toby Mendel, Chair of FOIAnet. “This is a wonderful way to build on our anniversary 10-10-10 Statement: Achievements, Challenges and Goals on the 10th Anniversary of the Freedom of Information Advocates Network (FOIAnet).”

A key goal of the Update is to foster a better understanding among FOIAnet’s members and others about civil society developments regarding RTI in the different regions of the world. The Update also aims to help RTI advocates by sharing information about successful strategies for tackling challenges, to foster better understanding and to stimulate international dialogue among the different regions, and to draw attention to the global nature of the RTI movement so as to further strengthen it.

Lydia Medland, lead editor of the report, said, “The report shows that advocates still have a long way to go to see their goal achieved of a universal right to information, however, it also clearly transmits the strength of the movement and their ability to effectively confront obstacles to change.”

Disagreements over the scope and nature of copyright rules have made it one of the most high profile battlegrounds regarding issues affecting freedom of expression. Around the world, rights-holding lobbies are pushing for increasingly draconian measures to combat copyright infringements, while others are calling for copyright law to be significantly revised to align it with modern digital realities. Both sides claim international guarantees of freedom of expression support their causes. On 24 June 2013, the Centre for Law and Democracy (CLD), the Centro de Estudios en Libertad de Expresión y Acceso a la Información (CELE) and Fundación Via Libre (FVL) held a workshop in Buenos Aires, Argentina, to discuss problems with the international framework for copyright and possible solutions.

The workshop, which was attended by participants from across Latin America, featured presentations by Michael Karanicolas of CLD and Beatriz Busaniche of FVL, and was moderated by Eduardo Bertoni of CELE. A report on copyright by CLD with draft recommendations served as background material for the workshop.

Click here for a Summary of the draft Report in English
Click here for a Summary of the draft Report in Spanish

“Copyright law needs to be fundamentally reformed to reflect a better accommodation of freedom of expression in all of its aspects,” said Toby Mendel, Executive Director of CLD. “We hope that our report, which will be finalised soon, will help situate the debate about copyright reform more firmly within a human rights framework.”

The core challenge of copyright from a freedom of expression perspective is that its protections help foster creative output, while at the same time limiting access to expressive material. International copyright rules no longer strike an appropriate balance between these two interests, including because of the fundamental changes brought about by digital information technologies.

On 2 June 2013, Jordan’s Press and Publications Department issued an order blocking hundreds of websites due to their failure to register with the government. The order drew international condemnation, mainly because it is the first high-profile case of implementation of Jordan’s new legal regime for the print media, which was amended in 2012 to extend onerous registration and other requirements to the Internet. Today, the Centre for Law and Democracy released Comments on the Law Amending the Press and Publications Law of 2012, which highlights the severe problems with these amendments from the perspective of freedom of expression.

Click here to read the Analysis

“These amendments are at best a clumsy attempt to regulate the Internet,” said Toby Mendel, Executive Director of CLD. “If they were really properly implemented, they would threaten the very viability of the Internet in Jordan, as they require the authorities to block access to most social media websites.”

The main problems identified in the Comments include the following:
• The scope of the Law is extremely broad, inasmuch as it applies to any website that hosts any comment on current affairs in Jordan.
• The Law imposes onerous registration requirements on ‘news websites’.
• Websites which breach the law, including by failing to register, are subject to mandatory blocking provisions applied by a government department.
• Websites must record information about all users who submit comments.
• The Law treats comments submitted by users as journalistic content authored by the website, effectively forcing websites to vet all user-generated content.

CLD calls upon the Jordanian government to introduce significant amendments to the 2012 amendments to the Press and Publications law to bring it into line with international human rights standards, including by repealing the registration, moderation and tracking obligations for websites, as well as the blocking rules.

The Centre for Law and Democracy is today releasing a Note analysing the freedom of expression provisions in the new draft Constitution for Tunisia, dated 1 June 2013. As the foundational document for the system of governance in post revolutionary Tunisia, it is very important that the Constitution provide strong guarantees for human rights and particularly those rights, including freedom of expression, which were roundly abused under the previous regime.

Click here to read the Analysis in English
Click here to read the Analysis in Arabic

“We welcome the strong guarantees for freedom of expression and information in the new draft Constitution,” said CLD Executive Director, Toby Mendel. “We do, however, recommend further changes to bring them fully into line with international standards.”

Key recommendations in the CLD Note include the following:
• The regime for restrictions on freedom of expression and information should be consolidated into one provision to avoid duplication and potential confusion.
• Restrictions on expression and access to information should be permitted only where they are provided by law and are necessary to protect an overriding interest.
• The Constitution should envisage two independent bodies in the information sector – a broadcast regulator and an access to information oversight body – rather than a single body with an extremely broad mandate, as the draft currently provides for.

CLD urges the relevant Tunisian authorities and stakeholders to do what they can to promote further reform of the draft Constitution to bring it into line with international standards.