Re: On the european response to Snowden

Mathias:

What form does the proposed CODEX take?  Is it a treaty-like instrument 
or is it more like a consensus agreement?  If the latter, perhaps we 
should revisit the investigatory principles that were agreed on both 
sides of the Atlantic  by the high level group?

Joe
On 1/27/2015 6:17 AM, Mathias Vermeulen wrote:
> In that context I'd like to draw the attention of this group to a 
> report on 'mass surveillance' which was adopted yesterday by the 
> Council of 
> Europe.http://website-pace.net/documents/19838/1085720/20150126-MassSurveillance-EN.pdf/df5aae25-6cfe-450a-92a6-e903af10b7a2
>
> The Assembly of the Council of Europe urged Council of Europe Member 
> States and Observer States (which includes the U.S.) to "agree on a 
> multilateral “Intelligence Codex” for their intelligence services, 
> which lays down rules governing cooperation for purposes of the fight 
> against terrorism and organised crime. *The Codex should include a 
> mutual engagement to apply to the surveillance of each other’s 
> nationals and residents the same rules as those applied to their own, 
> and to share data obtained through lawful surveillance measures solely 
> for the purposes for which they were collected."*
>
> More details on this recommendation can be found in paragraphs 115-118 
> of the report. The report is in line with the proposals of the 
> European Council on Foreign Affairs which was initially posted in this 
> discussion, and this paper that was published by the Oxford Internet 
> Institute earlier this month: 
> http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2551164
>
> 2015-01-27 11:49 GMT+01:00 David Singer <singer@apple.com 
> <mailto:singer@apple.com>>:
>
>
>     > On Jan 27, 2015, at 11:46 , Mike O'Neill
>     <michael.oneill@baycloud.com <mailto:michael.oneill@baycloud.com>>
>     wrote:
>     >
>     > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>     > Hash: SHA1
>     >
>     > There is also a international dimension, with transatlantic
>     agreements on privacy,  cybersecurity and surveillance being
>     publically discussed, and it is clear these things are
>     interrelated, addressing one will always involve consideration of
>     the others.
>     >
>     > There does not have to be a trade-off, no need to forgo privacy
>     for the sake of security. We should be able to build a system with
>     them all.
>     >
>     > What is needed is a clearly expressed “statement of
>     requirements” i.e. we want to protect privacy and security within
>     a transparent and democratically accountable framework which, for
>     example, allows law enforcement to do its job (using warranted
>     surveillance if necessary), but rules out mass surveillance. 
>     Because the net knows no borders there has to be a transnational
>     component.
>     >
>     > The W3C could then do its part helping to create the necessary
>     protocols and standards, while the politicians take charge of the
>     oversight process and creating the legal environment.
>     >
>
>     If you have even vague visions for what protocols and standards
>     could help here, could you sketch them out?
>
>     David Singer
>     Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
>
>
>