Directive Terrorisme/Amendements LIBE/en

De La Quadrature du Net
Cette page est une version traduite de la page Directive Terrorisme/Amendements LIBE et la traduction est complétée à 93 %.

Autres langues :
English • ‎français

Extension of surveillance measures in compromise amendments [COMP] in the Terrorism Directive

[COMP 6] Recital 7a: "Removing illegal content"

The recital 7a in the directive is originally about the definition of the public provocation to terrorist acts and writes it down in all the actions that have to be fought in the anti terror directive.

Since the Hohlmeier report, the ability to block access to websites or pages on the Internet advocating terrorism is introduced. This measure, inscribed in French law since 2014, has demonstrated its operational inefficiency and numerous human rights abuses including the rights to freedom of expression and information. However, it is in the directive without any sufficient guarantees from the rapporteur.

The following versions of this compromise amendment, not only do not come back on this blocking measure, but add another one from MEP Rachida Dati report (3 November 2015) on "preventing radicalization and recruitment of European Union citizens by terrorists organizations". This report recommends that Member States could be criminally sue Internet service companies and social networks that do not respond favourably to a request exercised by a "public authority" without the nature of the public authority being specified, which leaves the possibility of withdrawal requests without any procedural guarantees and no transparency.

In the latest version of the amendment, the notion of public authority disappears, leaving more open the possibility of abusive requests for withdrawal or blocking of online content. The right to fair trial and to legal action is not clearly define for citizens.

[COMP 9] Recital 15a: "Invetigative tools"

This recital added by the compromise amendement 9 [COMP 9] relates on means used by antiterror investigations.

Not present in the original text of the European Commission, it was added by the rapporteur Monika Holhmeier and has continued to be strengthened with each evolution of the text. Originally planned to grant to the fight against terrorism the same means than against organized crime, it was worsen to allow the widest intrusions in electronic surveillance, interception of communications, audio capture or video, in public or private places, as well as the financial and banking searches.

As it, it would legitimize the most extreme anti-terror laws or surveillance measures of the European Union.