45 Countries Suppress Internet Access - New Zealand Too?
posted 12th January 2001

The New Zealand Government is proposing legislation to allow Internet data to be intercepted to and from New Zealand citizens. PlaNet opposes this legislation (see earlier article). Once again it seems New Zealand Governments are placing us in the `developing world' oft-called `third world' group of countries with their low wages, lack of environmental and socially protective legislation and few rights for citizens - unless they are rich. Governments in 45 countries across the developing world are being taken to task for placing restrictions on their citizens' ability to access information on the internet. In most cases, government control has been achieved by compelling citizens to subscribe to a state-run Internet Service Provider (ISP), charges Reporters Without Borders (known by its French acronym RSF, for Reporters Sans Frontiers). Some governments, on the other hand, have imposed restrictions by installing filters blocking access to web sites regarded as ''unsuitable'' and sometimes forcing internet users to register with state authorities, adds this Paris-based media rights monitor in a new study, 'The Enemies of the Internet'.

For RSF, furthermore, 20 of the 45 countries surveyed in its study may be described as the ''real enemies'' of this new means of communication, given the extent of infringements that prevail. ''On the pretext of protecting the public from 'subversive ideas' or defending 'national security and unity,' some governments totally prevent their citizens from gaining access to the internet,'' it points out. Included in this list of ''real enemies'' are nations such as Belarus, Burma, China, Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia and Vietnam. Also identified are countries of Central Asia and the Caucasus, like Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kirghizia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. In the case of Saudi Arabia, for instance, despite the presence of 37 private companies permitted to operate as ISPs, ''all traffic at the moment goes through the servers of the Science and Technology Centre, a public body, which is equipped with filters banning access to sites that provide 'information contrary to Islamic values','' says RSF. In that Arab nation, furthermore, the internet has been officially regarded as ''a harmful force for westernising people's minds''. Regards Cuba, on the other hand, the government controls the internet in the same way it does for the other media, the study reveals. ''There is no free expression in Cuba at the national level.''

While in China, despite the rapid spread of the internet, the government continues to ''keep up pressure'' on users. ''In order to prevent the Chinese from finding information on the web, the authorities have blocked access to some sites,'' notes the study. Evidence RSF gathered from countries like Burma and Sierra Leone point to other impediments to the internet culture, too. In Burma, a law passed in September 1996 obliges anyone who owns a computer to declare it to the government. ''Those who fail to comply may face up to 15 years in prison.'' And in Sierra Leone, the authorities have attacked journalists working for an online newspaper. Its findings also expose the consequences of such interference with access to the information superhighway. For medical students in Iran, where censorship of the internet is identical to that affecting other media, it has meant being denied access to web sites that deal with anatomy. For RSF, such efforts at censorship go against the grain of Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which states that everyone shall have the right to receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of the frontiers. Moreover, it adds, 14 of the countries where such censorship occurs have signed this international covenant to uphold the rights spelled out in it. These countries, declares RSF, need to ''respect the undertakings they made''. The restrictions have posed a dilemma for some of the 45 countries listed by RSF. That stems from the economic potential of the internet, as a catalyst for growth and development. ''The internet is a two-edged sword for authoritarian regimes,'' remarks RSF. On the one hand, ''it enables any citizen to enjoy an unprecedented degree of freedom of speech and therefore constitutes a threat to the government. ''On the other hand, however, the internet is a major factor in economic growth, due in particular to online trade and the exchange of technical and scientific information, which prompts some of these governments to promote its spread,'' it adds.

This dilemma, in fact, comes to light in two East Asian countries Malaysia and Singapore. According to RSF, ''The economic argument seems to be winning the day in countries such as Malaysia and Singapore, where controlling 'dangerous' sites is proving difficult for the authorities.'' Moreover, it also affirms that the efforts by governments to block wide access to the internet is being chipped away in some countries by ingenious web users. ''Web surfers can find ways round censorship: encoding, going through servers that offer anonymity when consulting banned sites or sending e- mails, connecting via cellphones and so on.'' But such measures need not be taken if access to the information superhighway is open and free. And to achieve that in the 20 countries with severe restrictions, RSF has called on the governments in question to implement change. Among RSF's recommendations are: the abolition of state monopoly on internet access, a stop to the control of ISPs, the cancellation of the obligation for citizens to register with the government for internet access, a stop to censorship through use of filters, and an end to legal proceedings against internet users.