Punishing users of extremist websites
French President Nicolas Sarkozy has proposed a law to punish readers of websites promoting terrorism and violence, writes Clementine de Montjoye.
Nicolas Sarkozy (Photo by Marc Piasecki/Getty Images).
उदहारण
On 15th March 2012, Mohammed Merah killed two soldiers of the French army and left a third in a coma. A few days later, on19th March, Merah attacked a Jewish school in Toulouse shooting at point blank range a teacher and three children. It emerged from the investigation that Merah had been consulting jihadist websites and had been to Pakistan twice, arousing suspicions in the DCRI, the French intelligence agency. On 22 March 2012, in the aftermath of the attacks, French President Nicolas Sarkozy announced his intention of imposing stricter anti-terrorist measures. These included a proposed law condemning internet users who regularly visit websites promoting terrorism and violence. Inspired by the 2007 law aimed at regular users of child pornography websites, Sarkozy claimed that the criminilisation of this offence would allow quicker arrests of suspects without having to wait for tangible proof, and argued that had this law been implemented before, Merah might have been stopped earlier. Reporters Without Borders underlined the potential risks of such measures restricting free access to information and asked Sarkozy to be more specific about the methods that would be used to enforce this law.
Personalmente, me indigna y me da un poco de miedo este tipo de propuestas que aumentan el control del gobierno hacia los ciudadanos. ¿Quién pone el límite de lo que se puede decir y lo que no? ¿Los intereses del gobierno en cuestión?. Según mi opinión, no es terrorismo todo lo que ataca al gobierno, pues puede que el gobierno no tenga razón; y esta ley me parece un arma con la que el gobierno francés se blinda no solo contra terrorismos, sino también contra cualquier amenaza antisistema que ponga en peligro su situación de poder.
Je res da zakoni vedno znova vzbujajo vprašanje kje je meja med svobodo izražanja in kontrolo nad internetom. Čeprav se osebno strinjam z zgornim zakonon menim da je potrebno postaviti jasno mejo kaj se smatra za terorizem oziroma kaj je dovoljeno in kaj ne. Pojavlja se tudi vprašanje mar s tem zakonom kršimo pravico do izražanja in jo tudi kratimo čeprov vzameno da zaščitimo državo. Osebno menim da je zakon dober vendar more imeti jasno postavljene meje.
I find the notion of flagging content as unlawful or suspicious highly offensive. Even if the law defines explicitly what websites could be considered violent or terrorist activity it sends the message that the government is able to suppress or outlaw information and expressions it disagrees with. Today it could be a terrorist or pedophile website, in 20 years it could be anything.
That’s right my friend but for me it’s strange to punish someone who is watching those websites… If you ask me, those sites should be shutted down!
Pozdrav,
Ovako ima par stvari koje bih rekao u vezi ovog;
I) Sa nekog mog gledalista na ovakve stvari, stvarno kaznjavati ljude koji posecuju ekstremiticke sajtove je malo suludo, jedan od razloga je zato sto pola ljudi ni ne shvataju gde ulaze ( jer koliko god mi mislili da je svaka osoba oko nas kompijuterski skolovana grdno se varamo, jer statistika govori drugacije) , a drugo je zato sto su ljudi koji znaju gde su usli radoznali, zele da znaju nesto vise o tome, i onda naravno udju na sajtove tog tipa
II) Treba kaznjavati, zasto? pa to moze dati ideju nekim ljudima koji su patriote, i misle da treba da brane drzavu od (nepostojecih) neprijatelja, i to stvara velike probleme, jer takvih ljudi je sve vise.
Zakljucak moj bi bio da ne treba kaznjavati te ljude sto posecuju, ali treba oformiti tim programera koji ce pratiti takve sajtove i odma ih rusiti!
Srdacan pozdrav!
btw do I need to write on english? It seems google translate aint working atm or, it cant translate what I wrote? :s
Hi Durex, the idea is that you use the Google translate button to translate other people’s comments rather than your own. Please write in whatever language you feel most comfortable.
io credo che seppure limitando la privacy individuale sia una buona mossa, insomma perchè qualcuno dovrebbe guardare certi siti se non interessato? o comunque guardali frequentemente? credo che se per il bene collettivo si possa rinunciare a qualche libertà.
It seems to me that Sarkozy’s proposal is too much of a drastic measure. I do understand that such a law could avoid future terrorists acts but it is also true that governments always have their own personal agendas other than doing whats for the greater good.
but as mentioned above the government could simply shut down the sites that preach violence or terrorism.
What we have to keep in mind when voting for or against these drastic laws is that they could always be counter productive, like the government having too much control and the very essence of ‘freedom of speech’ dissolving into thin air.
Imagine the same situation in a religious society: Governments threatening to jail and punishing people for watching internet pornography. Wouldn’t that result in a public outcry although the religious people would celebrate such a law.
In my personal opinion there are many other things that could be done other than punishing people for visiting websites. And other governments are actually taking very strict measures other than just tracking down our browser history.