rights

End of Anonymous Drinking

Once again the United Kingdom is pushing itself into the forefront of the implementation of surveillance technology.

In an attempt to curb alcohol related violence and under-age drinking pubs are now increasing the use of an experimental system that involves taking fingerprints identification data from pub patrons. Once the patrons have been identified all they need to do is to scan their fingerprints at the door to be admitted.

The scheme has been applauded for simplifying the hassle of identity cards and the database will also make it possible for pubs to ban violent patrons for limited time periods.

Schemes such as this are usually launched on the idea of security and fears are downplayed by the use of the word voluntary. The problem being that schemes such as this are invasive as they are (even worse if they are abused). Additionally the idea of voluntary as a protection of integrity is not enough.

Once voluntary systems are implemented it usually does not take long before those in charge begin to view those who have not volunteered as first being annoying since they disrupt the system and then suspicious since they â??obviouslyâ?? have something to hide.

More
BBC.co.uk

The Register

Wiltshire.co.uk

(via Slashdot)

Posted on by mklang

Road to Gauntanamo

Have you seen the film Road to Guantanamo yet? If not then go see it. I have put it off for some time but now that I have – it absolutly terrified me. The story is about four young men who travel to Pakistan. One is about to be married and the others are there to attend.

Through a mix of youthful carelessness, bad luck and the chaos of war they are detained and considered to be members of Al-Qaeda. The brutal treatment and torture they face at the hands of the US military is absolutly barbaric. They are abused and tortured to obtain confessions – something which the military fail to obtain despite their treatment.

Even if they had obtained forced confessions from the men – what are these results worth? They are not the truth. And the treatment makes those carrying it out less human. The US cannot claim to be the “good-guy” anymore. Their brutality does not make them better than any other “evil” torturer which we would condemn elsewhere.

Despite the torture being carried out at Guantanamo and the number of detainees and the number of years they have been held it is important to remember that the US has not achieved one single conviction. It is only brutality without law. To those who want to claim the honour of fighting for their beliefs and country – the actions of the men at Guantanamo put your actions, your country and your armed forces to shame.

See this movie!! It is an important movie about the horror of war, the madness of belief over reason, against the evils of torture and the strength of those who are subjected to evil treatment.

What terrifies me the most is the ability of countries to commit crimes while being able to maintain a rhetoric of peace and humanity…

The movie website contains both the trailer and information about the infamous prison. Amnesty International has a broschure to accompany the film: The Road to Guantanamo Action Guide.
About the detainees at Guantanamo Amnesty International writes:

None of the detainees have been granted prisoner of war status or brought before a â??competent tribunalâ?? to determine his statusâ?¦The US government refuses to clarify their legal status, despite calls from the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to do so. Instead, the US government labels them â??enemy combatantsâ?? or â??terroristsâ??, flouting their right to be presumed innocent and illegally presuming justification for the denial of many of their most basic human rights.

Posted on by mklang

Can we forgive if we never forget?

An old saying which is often cited is â??forgive and forgetâ??. Another is the idea that â??time heals all woundsâ??. These two useful adages express an interesting idea that bad memories fade with time. This may be true. But they do not take into consideration the ubiquitous camera phone.

Most people have forgotten most of the painfully embarrassing things they did as a teenage. Some people are able to recall things they did as a teenager that they are thankful not many others remember. A few of us, hopefully not very many, may still carry scars of things that happened long ago.

But things are different now. This is a simplistic statement. But valid nonetheless.

Most things that happened in the teenage period of most adults today occurred off-camera. Not all â?? but most. Growing up today is different. Most, if not all, friends and acquaintances carry cameras with them in their mobile telephones. This ensures that most, if not all, memorable occasions will be recorded.

Can you imagine if the un-reflected, immature actions of your youth were stored on a hard disk somewhere? The threat of revelation will ensure that you can never relax completely. This goes beyond an old friend showing up and discussing â??the old daysâ?? â?? there is no element of deniability once the image is produced. But there is ample room for misinterpretation.

How will the future accommodate this? Will the future be filled with paranoid stunted people fearing the revelation of past indiscretions? Or will the future free itself from the actions of its youth? The latter would be the same as experiencing the past as an exotic, but irrelevant, distant country. Familiar but not.

The forgiving and forgetting will not be quite so easy anymoreâ?¦

Posted on by mklang

Return of Eugenics?

All people in power are scary. From annoying taxi drivers who feel a need to spout their home-grown loony political theories believe they are right since nobody contradicts them (we just want to arrive at our destinations) to world leaders who interpret their position in office as a sign that they are “chosen” or “special”. Naturally they are elected. But the mechanics of elections should not be interpreted to mean that they are “chosen” in the sense of “the chosen one”.

There is of course the problem that peopl in power tend to become isolated from the people they serve. This enhances the impression that they are “chosen”.

Tony Blair is a good example. He has long been moving towards “resolving” the issue of problem children and those involved in anti-social behaviour (a scary catch-all criminal offence in the UK). This is scary but not crazy-scary.

Crazy-scary is when he now states that the effort to prevent or resolve these issues may include measures “pre-birth”.

He said the government could say to an unmarried teenage mother who was not in a stable relationship: “Here is the support we are prepared to offer you, but we do need to keep a careful watch on you and how your situation is developing because all the indicators are that your type of situation can lead to problems in the future.”

Anastasia de Waal, of social policy think tank Civitas, was quoted on the BBC’s website as saying: “It is teetering on genetic determinism this kind of saying that before children are even born they are labelled as problematic.”

Link: globeandmail.com : Blair wants state to prevent growth of problem children.

also: BBC News: Blair hits back over ‘baby Asbos’

(via Question Technology)
Instead of attempting to deal with the social issues that lie at the root – these kinds of actions are levelled at attacking those who are already in an impossible situation. I was taught not to kick people who are already down…

Posted on by mklang

Prudent use of DNA

The official position towards the use of DNA in police investigations in Sweden has until quite recently been unanimously positive. This positive stance has occasionally burst out in fits of blind optimism. One such example was when an ex-police chief and a law professor wrote a debate article in one of the main Swedish newspapers arguing (on extremely weak arguments) that everyone in Sweden should be forced to give DNA samples since this would prevent those who had been forced to give DNA samples in the line of police inquiries from being discriminated.

This techno-optimism approach to DNA may however be receiving a few more sober reflective comments. In an article in Dagens Nyheter the head of Swedish homicide investigation Dag Andersson states that the police must be very careful of becoming single minded. In other words DNA is a useful tool but it can also limit the efficiency of the police since they are too busy searching and analysing DNA samples to actually use more traditional â?? and no less efficient methods.

My critique of DNA in police investigations is the danger of over-reliance on technology and the misallocation of resources. Taking masses of DNA samples from a high number of suspects is sloppy work. It promotes laziness and is connected with high costs. These costs could have been better used in preventative measures enacted before the crime took place.
The Swedish Minister of Justice is a big fan of the implementation of high-tech. But in common for all his techno-optimism is that they are high-cost measures designed to be implemented after the fact. This high-cost techno-optimism approach is designed to hide the fact that there is really no plan or initiative to work in a manner to prevent crime.

An additional “side-effect” is also that civil rights are trampled upon with the bad excuse that such trampling is necessary.

Posted on by mklang

Guantanamo – banality of evil

When Hannah Arendt wrote about the banality of evil she was criticised for her thesis that people who carry out unspeakable crimes are not be crazy fanatics, but ordinary individuals who simply accept the arguments of their state and voluntarily participate in the evil â?? they are indeed good bureaucrats, simply following orders. Arendtâ??s example was a key administrator in the Nazi death camp system (Adolf Eichmann).

It seems to me that this is the only way in which to understand the statement of Rear Admiral Harris that the Guantanamo suicides on 10th June: “This was not an act of desperation, but an act of asymmetric warfare committed against us.” (The Time, June 11). He is the good bureaucrat – dutiful, unquestioning and supportive. Absolutely terrifying.
The three detainees committed suicide by using nooses made of sheets and clothes. One of the men was first detained when he was a juvenile. They had been in prison up to four years, but never charged a crime. This means that they have no way of knowing if and when they will ever be released.
Before June 10th there had been 41 suicide attempts at the camp. About the detainees at Guantanamo Amnesty International writes:

None of the detainees have been granted prisoner of war status or brought before a â??competent tribunalâ?? to determine his status…The US government refuses to clarify their legal status, despite calls from the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to do so. Instead, the US government labels them â??enemy combatantsâ?? or â??terroristsâ??, flouting their right to be presumed innocent and illegally presuming justification for the denial of many of their most basic human rights.

Next week (23 June) the documentary Road to Guantanamo will be in the movies the website contains both the trailer and information about the infamous prison. Amnesty International has a broschure to accompany the film: The Road to Guantanamo Action Guide.

The banality of evil is in part the ability of the state to accept compromises such as Guantanamo – yet maintain they care about human rights. In addition to the general public opinion’s ability to forget that the evil is taking place…

Posted on by mklang

Does Bodström dream of high-tech hammers?

The Swedish Minister of Justice Thomas Bodström can without a doubt be placed among the European Ministerâ??s most hostile to civil liberties (older posts about this here & here & here). Besides blogging about it (along with many others) Henrik Sandklef and I wrote a debate article concerning this mans naïve faith in technological solutions to crime. It was published in the newspaper (in Swedish) and the Minister replied â?? well sort ofâ?¦he never actually met our arguments on civil rights violations, but claimed that the police needed tools to do their job (in Swedish).

Yesterday the Chairman of the Swedish Police Union, Björn Ericson, wrote in a debate article (in Swedish) that despite the Ministerâ??s claims that the police force has increased by 1500 policemen the actual numbers show that the number of policemen have decreased by almost 700 since 1997. Ericson wonders whether the 1500 policemen are all working deep undercover since nobody besides the Minister seems to know where they are.

Besides the politics (it is, after all, an election year), Ericson brings up a vital point in his article. Who will watch the tapes, analyse the data and read the log files? Much of the current wisdom concerning police enforcement deals with the importance of visibility. Policemen on the streets. It is not only important that the police patrol but also that they be seen to be patrolling.

Technology costs. The cost of building and maintaining a high-tech police force will create higher costs for the police. This will mean that they will have to make budget choices. Either be visible or spend money on technology. Our Minister has shown his inclination lies in the dream of a technological future â?? but what is missing in this dream?

Implementing the high-tech surveillance society will entail making choices. Simple choices with far reaching effects. The Bodström vision entails moving the police from all types of prevention and focus them on the cure. In the long run prevention is more cost efficient than cure. All the high-tech in the world cannot, will not, prevent crime. The only aspect of use is that high-tech may provide proof in the ensuing court case. And this can only be achieved through the trampling of civil liberties and therefore must only be used as little as possible.

The choices the police are being forced to make will therefore change their purpose. They will not be about the prevention of crime but rather the police will become the servants of the courts, the errand boys of the prosecutor. Despite their handcuffs, handguns and truncheons their primary work will be the collection of data for analysis. This is not unworthy work but it does not prevent the bulk of most crimes.

Technology such as that of bugging (phones and computers), DNA databases and surveillance cameras are all tools. Tools work well to resolve certain problems. With the right tools people became efficient â?? a large part of human development can be studied in the development of certain tools (fire, bronze axes, steam engines, silicon chipsâ?¦) but with the wrong tools the work becomes difficult, if not impossible. Of course you can bang in a nail with a screwdriver â?? but at a cost.

Most violent crimes (Terrorism, Saturday-night brawling, violence and abuse at home) will not be prevented by buying technology. The 9/11 terrorists used their own names â?? it would not have mattered to them if they had been asked to donate DNA. Putting more, and better trained, police on the streets â?? does have an effect on crime.

More patrolling policemen would not have prevented 9/11 â?? there is no way to prevent the determined. More patrolling police will not prevent abuse in homes. This takes an even more costly prevention â?? education and social welfare. But it is a better preventative cure for most other crimes. In addition to this it does not violate the civil rights of law-abiding people in the hope of catching the criminal.

There is a saying: When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. Thomas Bodström is busying buying the dream of the big high-tech hammer and no matter how many different problems people attempt to explain to him with this approach all he can see is nails â?? and he cannot wait to pound us down.

Posted on by mklang

blogg against torture

Yesterday (June, 12) the American Medical Association took an important ethical policy decision against medical participation in interrogations “Physicians must not conduct, directly participate in, or monitor an interrogation with an intent to intervene, because this undermines the physicianâ??s role as healer.â??
The UN has declared that the 26th June is the International Day in Support of Victims of Torture – what are we going to do about it?
There is no single face of torture. Unfortunately there happens to be several examples of the cruelty and heartlessness of men (no gender bias intended). Examples include the statement by Rear-Admiral Harris about the three suicides of prisoners under his responsibility was â??â?¦not an act of desperation, but an act of asymmetrical warfareâ?¦â?? or the comment of Nick Harvey when faced with the news that after WWII British troops had starved prisoners and tortured them with equipment taken from Gestapo prisons, says â??Itâ??s too late for anyone to be held personally responsible, or held politically to accountâ?¦â??

Ok so issues such as time, energy and emotional baggage tend to get in the way of a more active support. There is however a way of supporting without much effort. This is not a trivialisation – on the contrary it is the promotion of information to raise awareness. Not to let uncomfortable information slip into oblivion.

The group known as Torture Awareness Month has a blogrole going. By going to http://blogagainsttorture.blogspot.com/ and do two things:

All you need to do to join is (1) promise to do a blog post about torture in the month of June, (2) link to Torture Awareness Month somewhere your blog. Do both of these things, and we will link to you from our blogrolls.

Donâ??t forget to go to Torture Awareness Month to learn more about what is, and can be done, to raise awareness against torture. But don’t stop there. The information about torture, its causes, effects and how to work against it.

Some background…

The United Nations has declared the 26 June to be International Day in Support of Victims of Torture. The UN position against torture is based primarily on article 5 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states, â??no one shall be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishmentâ??

This is further qualified by the 1984 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the sentiments are echoed in conventions such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which adds that: â??No one shall be subjected without his [or her] free consent to medical or scientific experimentation.â??

Posted on by mklang

Brainstorming: The Politics of File Sharing

Its election year in Sweden and most parties are therefore working hard to show that they have the right stuff. Among the new problems the traditional parties have to face this year also offers up some new surprises like the rise of new political parties. In Sweden since the last election we have seen the rise of both a Feminist Party and a Pirate Party in addition to the attempt of The June List (a Swedish cross-party alliance in the EU Parliament) to become more active in national politics.

One of the issues which has been pushed into the forefront of the political debate is what the position should be on file-sharing.

I have been asked by an established political party to visit them and talk about Copyright, File Sharing, Creative Commons and associated issues. This spans a whole range of items from the technical to the philosophical.

So now I am calling for input â?? instead of just saying the politicians donâ??t get it, participate and help me by brainstorming around the topic: What every politician should understand about filesharing!

Add your comments in Swedish or English…

Posted on by mklang