#IndexAwards2019: Mohammed al-Maskati provides digital security training to activists in the Middle East and in North Africa

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_video link=”https://youtu.be/1VVGMgSHM6U”][vc_column_text]Mohammed al-Maskati is a Bahraini activist and digital security consultant who provides digital security training to activists in the Middle East and in North Africa.

Working as Frontline Defenders’ Digital Protection Consultant for the MENA Region, Mohammed teaches activists – ranging from vulnerable minorities to renowned campaigners taking on whole governments – to get the truth out despite governments’ attempt to shut them down. He educates them on the use of VPNs, and how to avoid falling into phishing or malware traps, create safe passwords and keep their accounts anonymous.

The MENA region is one of the most oppressive areas of the world for human rights defenders, but it is too often ignored by app and software developers, who do not provide products or instructions manual in Arabic.

Mohammed Al-Maskati opens the door to using digital security apps, and as a direct result of his training, a growing number of activists in the Middle East have reported being able to avoid government surveillance and reprisals.

Regional governments have also taken notice of Mohammed’s activities. In May 2014, during a visit to Oman, he was kidnapped from a taxi and disappeared for three days, during which he was asked the names of the people he was helping. He has been banned from travelling to at least five countries, making it more difficult to reach activists in the region.

A good example is Mohammed’s work in Iraq. Demonstrations erupted in September, and clashes broke out between protesters and Iraqi forces. The independent media websites reporting on the unrest were soon taken down by the government.

Mohammed travelled to Iraq and helped the activists to circumvent censorship, and the websites were able to keep going.

He had a similar impact in Egypt ahead of the March 2018 national elections, when the government was censoring not only websites but also several VPN services. Mohammed was able to arrange for a group of organisations to offer their VPN for free to Egyptian human rights defenders and journalists.

Mohammed has also been active to circumvent his travel ban. He has written Arabic-language training manuals on digital security, which he has released online, and set up a digital security email newsletter. He is also the founder of and part of the rapid response team, which is available 24 hours a day 7 days a week to help tackle digital attacks as they happen in real time.[/vc_column_text][vc_separator][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][vc_single_image image=”104691″ img_size=”full” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/2019/01/awards-2019/”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][vc_column_text]

2019 Freedom of Expression Awards

Index on Censorship’s Freedom of Expression Awards exist to celebrate individuals or groups who have had a significant impact fighting censorship anywhere in the world.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_separator][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1552650108302-4a47418b-5e3e-10″ taxonomies=”26925″][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Global champions of free expression: 2019 Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression Awards shortlist announced

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”104533″ img_size=”full”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_single_image image=”104535″ img_size=”full”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]

  • Judges include investigative journalist Maria Ressa, one of Time magazine’s people of the Year 2018; actor Khalid Abdalla
  • Shortlist celebrates artists, campaigners and activists from Saudi Arabia to Serbia, Colombia to Cameroon

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_column_text]A self-exiled Saudi street artist who uses murals to challenge her homeland’s repression of women, a Nigerian organisation that fosters community radio, a group of digital activists tackling online trolls in Colombia, and a Serbian collective of investigative journalists exposing government corruption are among the individuals and organisations shortlisted for the 2019 Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression Awards Fellowships.

Drawn from more than 400 crowdsourced nominations, the shortlist celebrates artists, writers, journalists and campaigners fighting for freedom of expression against immense obstacles. Many of the 15 shortlisted nominees face regular death threats, others criminal prosecution or exile. Some are currently in prison for daring to speak out against the status quo.

“Free speech is the cornerstone of a free society – and it’s under increasing threat worldwide. That’s why it’s more important than ever to recognise the groups and individuals willing to stand up for it,” said Jodie Ginsberg, CEO of campaigning nonprofit Index on Censorship.

Awards fellowships are offered in four categories: arts, campaigning, digital activism and journalism.

Nominees include exiled street artist Ms. Saffaa whose murals highlight women’s rights and human rights violations in Saudi Arabia; Nigeria’s Institute for Media and Society, which goes to great lengths to improve the country’s media landscape by challenging government regulation and aiding the creation of community radio stations in rural areas; Colombia’s Fundación Karisma, which fights back against internet trolls and promotes freedom of expression online; and The Center for Investigative Journalism of Serbia (CINS), an independent group of investigative journalists exposing corruption in the country.

Other nominees include ArtLords, a grassroots movement of artists and volunteers in Afghanistan; P24 (Platform for Independent Journalism), a civil society organisation with an ambitious goal of neutralising censorship in Turkey; Mohammed al-Maskati, a Bahraini activist and digital security consultant who provides digital security training to activists in the Middle East and in North Africa; and Mehman Huseynov, an imprisoned journalist and human rights defender who documents corruption and human rights violations in Azerbaijan.

Judges for this year’s awards, now in its 19th year, are award-winning investigative journalist and Rappler.com Editor-in-Chief Maria Ressa, actor and filmmaker Khalid Abdalla, computer scientist and author Dr. Kate Devlin, and writer and social activist Nimco Ali.

Abdalla said: “The abyss we are facing all over the world requires acts of courage and intellect capable of changing the terms of how we think and respond to the challenges ahead. We have to celebrate those who inspire us and lead by example, not just because they have managed to break barriers in their own contexts, but because some part of what they do holds a key for us all.”

Winners, who will be announced at a gala ceremony in London on 4 April, become Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression Awards Fellows and are given year-long support for their work, including training in areas such as advocacy and communications.

“Many of the things that I dreamt of happening one day, in an idealistic way, have become reality, all thanks to Index,” Wendy Funes, 2018 Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression Journalism Fellow, said. “Solidarity, love and friendship are really the things that can move this world, and that is what Index is made of with all of the support they have extended to me.”

This year, the Freedom of Expression Awards are being supported by sponsors including SAGE Publishing, Google, Private Internet Access, Edwardian Hotels, Vodafone, France Médias Mondes and Psiphon. Illustrations of the nominees were created by Sebastián Bravo Guerrero.

Notes for editors:

  • Index on Censorship is a UK-based non-profit organisation that publishes work by censored writers and artists and campaigns against censorship worldwide.
  • More detail about each of the nominees is included below.
  • The winners will be announced at a ceremony in London on 4 April.

For more information, or to arrange interviews with any of those shortlisted, please contact Sean Gallagher on 0207 963 7262 or [email protected]. More biographical information and illustrations of the nominees are available at indexoncensorship.org/indexawards2019.[/vc_column_text][vc_custom_heading text=”Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression Awards nominees 2019″ use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]

Arts

for artists and arts producers whose work challenges repression and injustice and celebrates artistic free expression

[/vc_column_text][vc_single_image image=”104530″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center”][vc_column_text]ArtLords

Afghanistan

ArtLords is a grassroots movement of artists and volunteers in Afghanistan who encourage ordinary citizens, especially women and children, to paint the issues that concern them on so-called blast walls: walls the country’s rich and the powerful have built around themselves to protect them from violence while the poor fend for themselves. Their work has turned a symbol of fear, tension and separation into a platform where social issues can be expressed visually and discussed in the street. ArtLords has completed over 400 murals in 16 provinces of Afghanistan. In March 2018, for International Women’s Day, ArtLords painted a tribute to Professor Hamida Barmaki, a human rights defender killed in a terrorist attack six years ago.

Zehra Doğan

Turkey

Zehra Doğan is an imprisoned Kurdish painter and journalist who — denied access to materials for her work — paints with dyes made from crushed fruit and herbs, even blood, and uses newspapers and milk cartons as canvases. When she realised her reports from Turkey’s Kurdish region were being ignored by mainstream media, Doğan began painting the destruction in town of Nusaybin and sharing it on social media. For this she was arrested and imprisoned. Imprisonment hasn’t stopped her from producing journalism and art. She collects and writes stories about female political prisoners, reports on human rights abuses in prison, and paints despite the prison administration’s refusal to supply her with art materials.

ElMadina for Performing and Digital Arts

Egypt

ElMadina is a group of artists and arts managers who combine art and protest by encouraging Egyptians to get involved in performances in public spaces, defying the country’s restrictive laws. ElMadina’s work encourages participation — through story-telling, dance and theatre — to transform public spaces and marginalised areas in Alexandria and beyond into thriving environments where people can freely express themselves. Their work encourages free expression in a country in which public space is shrinking under the weight of government distrust of the artistic sector. ElMadina also carry out advocacy and research work and provide a physical space for training programmes, residencies and performances.

Ms Saffaa

Saudi Arabia / Australia

Ms Saffaa is a self-exiled Saudi street artist living in Australia who uses murals to highlight women’s rights and human rights violations in Saudi Arabia. Collaborating with artists from around the world, she challenges Saudi authorities’ linear and limited narrative of women’s position in Saudi society, and offers a counter narrative through her art. Part of a new generation of Saudi activists who take to social media to spread ideas, Ms Saffaa’s work has acquired international reach. In November 2018, she collaborated with renowned American artist and writer  Molly Crabapple on a mural celebrating murdered Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi that read, “We Saudis deserve better.” [/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]

Campaigning

for activists and campaigners who have had a marked impact in fighting censorship and promoting freedom of expression

[/vc_column_text][vc_single_image image=”104531″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center”][vc_column_text]Cartoonists Rights Network International

United States / International

Cartoonists Rights Network International (CRNI) is a small organisation with a big impact: monitoring threats and abuses against editorial cartoonists worldwide. Marshalling an impressive worldwide network, CRNI helps to focus international attention on cases in which cartoonists are persecuted and put pressure on the persecutors. CRNI tracks censorship, fines, penalties and physical intimidation – including of family members, assault, imprisonment, and even assassinations. Once a threat is detected, CRNI often partners with other human rights organisations to maximise the pressure and impact of a campaign to protect the cartoonist and confront those who seek to censor political cartoonists.

Institute for Media and Society

Nigeria

The Institute for Media and Society (IMS) is a Nigerian NGO that aims to improve the country’s media landscape by challenging government regulation and fostering the creation of community radio stations in rural areas at a time when local journalism globally is under threat. Three-quarters of television and radio stations in Nigeria are owned by politicians, and as a result they are divided along political lines, while rural communities are increasingly marginalised. IMS’s approach combines research and advocacy to challenge legal restrictions on the media as well as practical action to encourage Nigerians to use their voices, particularly via local radio. IMS also tracks violations of the rights of journalists in Nigeria.

Media Rights Agenda

Nigeria

Media Rights Agenda (MRA) is a non-profit organisation that has spent the last two decades working to improve media freedom and freedom of expression in Nigeria by challenging the government in courts. While the constitution guarantees the right to freedom of expression, other laws – including the sections of the Criminal Code, the Cybercrimes Act and the Official Secrets Act – limit and even criminalise expression. Through its active legal team, MRA has initiated strategic litigation targeting dozens of institutions, politicians and officials to improve the country’s legal framework around media freedom. Its persistent campaigning and lawsuits on freedom of information have helped improve access to government-held data.

P24 (Platform for Independent Journalism)

Turkey

P24 (Platform for Independent Journalism) is a civil society organisation that aims to neutralise censorship in Turkey — a country in which speaking freely courts fines, arrest and lengthy jail sentences. P24’s pro bono legal team defends journalists and academics who are on trial for exercising their right to free expression. It also undertakes coordinated social media and public advocacy work that includes live-tweeting from courtrooms and campaigning through an array of websites, newsletters and exhibition spaces. Its latest effort aims to provide spaces for collaboration and free expression in the form of a literature house and a project connecting lawyers and artists. [/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]

Digital Activism

for innovative uses of technology to circumvent censorship and enable free and independent exchange of information

[/vc_column_text][vc_single_image image=”104532″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center”][vc_column_text]Fundación Karisma

Colombia

Fundación Karisma is a civil society organisation that takes on online trolls by using witty online ‘stamps’ that flag up internet abuse. It’s an initiative that uses humour to draw attention to a serious problem: the growing online harassment of women in Colombia and its chilling effect. The organisation offers a rare space to discuss many issues at the intersection of human rights and technology in the country and then tackles them through a mix of research, advocacy and digital tools. Karisma’s “Sharing is not a crime” campaign supports open access to knowledge against the backdrop of Colombia’s restrictive copyright legislation.

Mohammed Al-Maskati

Middle East

Mohammed al-Maskati is a digital security consultant who provides training to activists in the Middle East and in North Africa. Working as Frontline Defenders’ Digital Protection Consultant for the MENA Region, Mohammed teaches activists – ranging from vulnerable minorities to renowned campaigners taking on whole governments – to communicate despite government attempt to shut them down. He educates them on the use of virtual private networks and how to avoid falling into phishing or malware traps, create safe passwords and keep accounts anonymous. As governments become more and more sophisticated in their attempts to track and crush dissent, the work of people like Al-Maskati is increasingly vital.

SFLC.in

India

SFLC.in (Software Freedom Law Centre) tracks internet shutdowns in India, a crucial service in a country with the most online blackouts of any country in the world. The tracker was the first initiative of its kind in India and has quickly become the top source for journalists reporting on the issue. As well as charting the sharp increase in the number and frequency of shutdowns in the country, the organisation has a productive legal arm and brings together lawyers, policy analysts and technologists to fight for digital rights in the world’s second most populous country. It also provides training and pro-bono services to journalists, activists and comedians whose rights have been curtailed.[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]

Journalism

for courageous, high-impact and determined journalism that exposes censorship and threats to free expression

[/vc_column_text][vc_single_image image=”104534″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center”][vc_column_text]Bihus.info

Ukraine

Bihus.info is a group of  independent investigative journalists in Ukraine who – despite threats and assaults – are fearlessly exposing the corruption of many Ukrainian officials. In the last two years alone, Bihus.info’s coverage has contributed to the opening of more than 100 legal cases against corrupt officials. Chasing money trails, murky real estate ownership and Russian passports, Bihus.info produces hard-hitting, in-depth TV reports for popular television programme, Nashi Hroshi (Our Money), which illuminates discrepancies between officials’ real wealth and their official income. One of the key objectives of the project is not just to inform, but to involve people in the fight against corruption by demonstrating how it affects their own well-being.

Center for Investigative Journalism of Serbia (CINS)

Serbia

Investigating corruption is one of the most dangerous jobs in journalism: three investigative reporters have been murdered in the European Union in the past year alone. In Serbia, journalists face death threats and smear campaigns portray investigative journalists as foreign-backed propagandists. Against this backdrop, Center for Investigative Journalism of Serbia (CINS) stands out as one of the last independent outlets left amid an increasingly partisan media. Using freedom of information requests, the CINS has created databases based on thousands of pages of documents to underpin its hard-hitting investigations. These include stories on loans provided to pro-government tabloids and TV channels. CINS also provides hands-on investigative journalism training for journalists and editors.

Mehman Huseynov

Azerbaijan

Mehman Huseynov is a journalist and human rights defender who documents corruption and human rights violations in Azerbaijan, consistently ranked among the world’s worst countries for press freedom. Sentenced to two years in prison in March 2017 after describing abuses he had suffered at a police station, Huseynov has put his life in danger to document sensitive issues. His work circulated widely on the internet, informing citizens about the real estate and business empires of the country’s government officials, and scrutinising the decisions of president Ilham Aliyev. Huseynov is still in prison and remains defiant, saying: “I am not here only for myself; I am here so that your children are not in my place tomorrow. If you uphold the judgement against me, you have no guarantees that you and your children will not be in my place tomorrow.”

Mimi Mefo

Cameroon

Mimi Mefo is one of less than a handful journalists working without fear or favour in Cameroon’s climate of repression and self-censorship. An award-winning broadcast journalist and the first-ever woman editor-in-chief of private media house Equinoxe TV and Radio, Mefo was arrested in November 2018 after she published reports that the military was behind the death of an American missionary in the country. Mefo reports on the escalating violence in the country’s western regions, a conflict that has become known as the  “Anglophone Crisis” and is a leading voice in exposing the harassment of other Cameroonian journalists, calling publicly for the release of those jailed.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

An open letter to Mark Zuckerberg

Dear Mark Zuckerberg:

What do the Philadelphia Museum of Art, a Danish member of parliament, and a news anchor from the Philippines have in common? They have all been subject to a misapplication of Facebook’s Community Standards. But unlike the average user, each of these individuals and entities received media attention, were able to reach Facebook staff and, in some cases, receive an apology and have their content restored. For most users, content that Facebook removes is rarely restored and some users may be banned from the platform even in the event of an error.

When Facebook first came onto our screens, users who violated its rules and had their content removed or their account deactivated were sent a message telling them that the decision was final and could not be appealed. It was only in 2011, after years of advocacy from human rights organizations, that your company added a mechanism to appeal account deactivations, and only in 2018 that Facebook initiated a process for remedying wrongful takedowns of certain types of content. Those appeals are available for posts removed for nudity, sexual activity, hate speech or graphic violence.

This is a positive development, but it doesn’t go far enough.

Today, we the undersigned civil society organizations, call on Facebook to provide a mechanism for all of its users to appeal content restrictions, and, in every case, to have the appealed decision re-reviewed by a human moderator.

Facebook’s stated mission is to give people the power to build community and bring the world closer together. With more than two billion users and a wide variety of features, Facebook is the world’s premier communications platform. We know that you recognize the responsibility you have to prevent abuse and keep users safe. As you know, social media companies, including Facebook, have a responsibility to respect human rights, and international and regional human rights bodies have a number of specific recommendations for improvement, notably concerning the right to remedy.

Facebook remains far behind its competitors when it comes to affording its users due process. 1 We know from years of research and documentation that human content moderators, as well as machine learning algorithms, are prone to error, and that even low error rates can result in millions of silenced users when operating at massive scale. Yet Facebook users are only able to appeal content decisions in a limited set of circumstances, and it is impossible for users to know how pervasive erroneous content takedowns are without increased transparency on Facebook’s part. 2

While we acknowledge that Facebook can and does shape its Community Standards according to its values, the company nevertheless has a responsibility to respect its users’ expression to the best of its ability. Furthermore, civil society groups around the globe have criticized the way that Facebook’s Community Standards exhibit bias and are unevenly applied across different languages and cultural contexts. Offering a remedy mechanism, as well as more transparency, will go a long way toward supporting user expression.

Earlier this year, a group of advocates and academics put forward the Santa Clara Principles on Transparency and Accountability in Content Moderation, which recommend a set of minimum standards for transparency and meaningful appeal. This set of recommendations is consistent with the work of the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion of the right to freedom of expression and opinion David Kaye, who recently called for a “framework for the moderation of user- generated online content that puts human rights at the very center.” It is also consistent with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, which articulate the human rights responsibilities of companies.

Specifically, we ask Facebook to incorporate the Santa Clara Principles into their content moderation policies and practices and to provide:

Notice: Clearly explain to users why their content has been restricted.

  • Notifications should include the specific clause from the Community Standards that the content was found to violate.
  • Notice should be sufficiently detailed to allow the user to identify the specific content that was restricted and should include information about how the content was detected, evaluated, and removed.
  • Individuals must have clear information about how to appeal the decision.

Appeals: Provide users with a chance to appeal content moderation decisions.

  • Appeals mechanisms should be easily accessible and easy to use.
  • Appeals should be subject to review by a person or panel of persons that was not involved in the initial decision.
  • Users must have the right to propose new evidence or material to be considered in the review.
  • Appeals should result in a prompt determination and reply to the user.
  • Any exceptions to the principle of universal appeals should be clearly disclosed and compatible with international human rights principles.
  • Facebook should collaborate with other stakeholders to develop new independent self-regulatory mechanisms for social media that will provide greater accountability3

Numbers: Issue regular transparency reports on Community Standards enforcement.

  • Present complete data describing the categories of user content that are restricted (text, photo or video; violence, nudity, copyright violations, etc), as well as the number of pieces of content that were restricted or removed in each category.
  • Incorporate data on how many content moderation actions were initiated by a user flag, a trusted flagger program, or by proactive Community Standards enforcement (such as through the use of a machine learning algorithm).
  • Include data on the number of decisions that were effectively appealed or otherwise found to have been made in error.
  • Include data reflecting whether the company performs any proactive audits of its unappealed moderation decisions, as well as the error rates the company found.

Article 19, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Center for Democracy and Technology, and Ranking Digital Rights

Fundación Ciudadano Inteligente
7amleh – Arab Center for Social Media Advancement
Access Now
ACLU Foundation of Northern California
Adil Soz – International Foundation for Protection of Freedom of Speech
Africa Freedom of Information Centre (AFIC)
Albanian Media Institute
American Civil Liberties Union
Americans for Democracy & Human Rights in Bahrain (ADHRB)
Arab Digital Expression Foundation
Artículo 12
Asociación Mundial de Radios Comunitarias América Latina y el Caribe (AMARC ALC)
Association for Progressive Communications
Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law
Bytes for All (B4A)
CAIR San Francisco Bay Area
CALAM
Cartoonists Rights Network International (CRNI)
Cedar Rapids, Iowa Collaborators
Center for Independent Journalism – Romania
Center for Media Studies & Peace Building (CEMESP)
Child Rights International Network (CRIN)
Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
Digital Rights Foundation
EFF Austin
El Instituto Panameño de Derecho y Nuevas Tecnologías (IPANDETEC)
Electronic Frontier Finland
Elektronisk Forpost Norge
Foro de Periodismo Argentino
Foundation for Press Freedom – FLIP
Freedom Forum
Fundación Acceso
Fundación Ciudadano Inteligente
Fundación Datos Protegidos
Fundación Internet Bolivia.org
Fundación Vía Libre
Fundamedios – Andean Foundation for Media Observation and Study
Garoa Hacker Club
Gulf Center for Human Rights
HERMES Center for Transparency and Digital Human Rights
Hiperderecho
Homo Digitalis
Human Rights Watch
Idec – Brazilian Institute of Consumer Defense
Independent Journalism Center (IJC)
Index on Censorship
Initiative for Freedom of Expression – Turkey
Instituto Nupef
International Press Centre (IPC)
Internet without borders
La Asociación para una Ciudadanía Participativa ACI Participa
MARCH
May First/People Link
Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA)
Media Rights Agenda (MRA)
Mediacentar Sarajevo
New America’s Open Technology Institute
NYC Privacy
Open MIC (Open Media and Information Companies Initiative)
OpenMedia
Pacific Islands News Association (PINA)
Panoptykon Foundation
PEN America
PEN Canada
Peninsula Peace and Justice Center
Portland TA3M
Privacy Watch
Raging Grannies
ReThink LinkNYC
Rhode Island Rights
SFLC.in
SHARE Foundation
SMEX
South East Europe Media Organisation
Southeast Asian Press Alliance (SEAPA)
SumOfUs
Syrian Archive
Syrian Center for Media and Freedom of Expression (SCM)
t4tech
Techactivist.org
The Association for Freedom of Thought and Expression
Viet Tan
Vigilance for Democracy and the Civic State
Visualizing Impact
Witness


1See EFF’s Who Has Your Back? 2018 Report https://www.eff.org/who-has-your-back-2018, and Ranking Digital Rights Indicator G6, https://rankingdigitalrights.org/index2018/indicators/g6/.

2 See Ranking Digital Rights, Indicators F4 https://rankingdigitalrights.org/index2018/indicators/f4/, and F8, https://rankingdigitalrights.org/index2018/indicators/f8/ and New America’s Open Technology Institute, “Transparency Reporting Toolkit: Content Takedown Reporting”,https://www.newamerica.org/oti/reports/transparency-reporting-toolkit-content-takedown-reporting/

3 For example, see Article 19’s policy brief, “Self-regulation and ‘hate speech’ on social media platforms,”https://www.article19.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Self-regulation-and-%E2%80%98hate- speech%E2%80%99-on-social-media-platforms_March2018.pdf.

A letter to Aung San Suu Kyi: Overturn conviction, free Reuters journalists

At the recent World Economic Conference in Hanoi, Viet Nam, Aung San Suu Kyi defended the 3 September conviction and sentencing of Reuters reporters Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo and invited anyone who believes in the rule of law to point out why the judgment was problematic. 52 IFEX members and other groups have taken her up on this invitation.

Aung San Suu Kyi
State Counselor
Naypyidaw
Myanmar

Your Excellency,

Recently, at the World Economic Conference in Hanoi, Viet Nam, you defended the September 3 conviction and sentencing of Reuters reporters Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo for violating the Official Secrets Act, and invited anyone who believes in the rule of law to point out why the judgment was problematic. As a concerned group of more than 50 human rights and free expression organizations from around the world, we would like to take this opportunity to respond to your invitation and to call for Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo’s immediate and unconditional release.

First and foremost, contrary to your comments, the case is a clear attempt to restrict freedom of expression and independent journalism in Myanmar. Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo were arrested on December 12, 2017, in the course of doing their job as professional journalists: investigating military operations in northern Rakhine State. Specifically, the two men were investigating a massacre that took place in the village of Inn Din, during which 10 Rohingya men and boys were summarily executed by the security forces—a crime which the military later admitted to. This investigation—which came at a time when the Myanmar military and the civilian-led government rejected mounting reports of human rights violations in northern Rakhine State—was clearly in the public interest, and still is.

The law that was then used to prosecute them—the colonial-era Official Secrets Act—is one of a number of repressive laws that have been used to prosecute journalists and stymie media freedom. The Act is broadly worded, and grants wide powers to the government to determine what classifies as a “secret”—indeed, the entire Act goes well beyond the restrictions on the right to freedom of expression which are permitted under international human rights law on the grounds of national security.

Even within the terms of the Act itself, for a conviction under Section 3.1 (c), evidence should demonstrate that the accused had in their possession secret documents that “might be or is intended to be, directly or indirectly, useful to an enemy.” However, evidence and testimony presented during the pre-trial and trial hearings failed to demonstrate this was the case and instead established the following facts:

• The documents Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo are accused of possessing are not secret, but contain information already in the public domain;
• There is no evidence of intent to turn documents over to an enemy or to harm the country;
• Police testimony regarding the circumstances of their arrest was contradictory;
• Moreover, a police whistleblower credibly testified that the two journalists had been framed: namely, that police were ordered by their superiors to invite Wa Lone to a meeting so he could be handed documents and then immediately arrested;
• Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo were subject to ill-treatment after their initial arrest, including incommunicado detention for two weeks, hooding, and sleep deprivation.

In summary, we believe that that Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo should never have been arrested in the first place, let alone prosecuted, convicted and imprisoned. Their trial, which was already manifestly unfair, was made more so by the repeated failure to uphold key tenets of the rule of law and to build a convincing evidence-based case against these journalists.

We therefore call on the Myanmar authorities to immediately and unconditionally release these two men, and reject the convictions against them. We further urge your government to work towards the swift review and amendment of all laws that can be used to unlawfully restrict the right to freedom of expression, so as to bring them into line with international human rights law and standards.

Yours respectfully,

PEN America
Adil Soz – International Foundation for Protection of Freedom of Speech
Afghanistan Journalists Center (AFJC)
Africa Freedom of Information Centre (AFIC)
Albanian Media Institute
Americans for Democracy & Human Rights in Bahrain (ADHRB)
ARTICLE 19
Association for Freedom of Thought and Expression (AFTE)
Bytes for All (B4A)
Cambodian Center for Human Rights (CCHR)
Cartoonists Rights Network International (CRNI)
Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility (CMFR) 
Centre for Independent Journalism (CIJ) 
Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
Freedom Forum
Fundamedios – Andean Foundation for Media Observation and Study
Globe International Center
Human Rights Watch (HRW)
Independent Journalism Center (IJC)
Index on Censorship
Initiative for Freedom of Expression – Turkey
International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)
International Press Institute (IPI) 
Mediacentar Sarajevo 
Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance
Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA)
Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA)
Media Rights Agenda (MRA)
Mizzima News
Norwegian PEN
OpenMedia
Pakistan Press Foundation
PEN Canada
Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
Southeast Asian Press Alliance (SEAPA)
South East Europe Media Organisation 
Vigilance for Democracy and the Civic State
World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers
Amnesty International
Athan – Freedom of Expression Activist Organization
Burma Campaign UK
Civil Rights Defenders
CSW
English PEN
Equality Myanmar
Free Expression Myanmar
Myanmar Media Lawyers’ Network
Norwegian Myanmar Committee
PEN Myanmar
Society for Threatened Peoples – Germany
South East Asian Journalist Unions (SEAJU)
The Swedish Burma Committee

SUPPORT INDEX'S WORK