My piece today on Bikya Masr announcing the launch of a new legal paper by the ANHRI. Just reading the title, and writing it on my own blog, makes me think about the difference between bloggers and "bloggers" as previously commented on in the Travis Randall article. I, of course, do not include myself as a blogger as I am discussing in the piece.
Life can be tough for bloggers in Egypt. The threats of imprisonment and interrogation have, for a long time, loomed large as authorities clamp down on “offensive”, controversial, or overtly critical material. Earlier this month, however, one Egyptian blogger ran into a new problem.
On September 3, Khaled el-Balshy – Editor-In-Chief of Al-Badeel newspaper, who also runs a personal blog at elbalshy.blogspot.com – was unofficially interrogated by members of the Interior Ministry’s Internet Crimes unit. The interrogation was not, however, over anything he had posted online, but over an anonymous comment that one user had left responding to a post. This is the first reported case of a blogger being held responsible for user comments on his site in Egypt, but other such stories have been reported in Syria and Malaysia, raising questions over where the responsibility lies for comments published on blogs.
As part of an effort to clear the murky legal waters surrounding anonymous commenting on websites, the Arabic Network for Human Rights Information (ANHRI) has published a new legal paper on the issue. The new paper “Web Sites Owners And Administrators’ Responsibility Of Posted Comments”, available via the ANHRI website, makes a range of proposals to a variety of parties, suggesting ways that all involved could ensure that el-Balshy’s story is not repeated. Writing to “web site owners and administrators, bloggers, visitors who post opinion or comments, the public prosecution and the judiciary specializing such cases”, the paper stresses that whilst bloggers are responsible for what they write in their posts, neither they, nor the site administrators, are responsible for what other people post.
At the same time, the ANHRI is keen to reserve the right of parties offended by website viewers to complain, and, if deemed necessary, for the offending content to be removed. They outline different options offended parties could take, suggesting that if they desire topic or content material removed from a site, they should inform the administrator in writing – emphasizing that no administrator or blogger should be legally questioned until they have received such a complaint in writing and been allowed time to act or respond.
The paper calls for parties and public figures to show restraint in making complaints, stating that “public figures are subject to criticism and a tolerance margin is required. If they accept to take public responsibility then they have agreed to live outside their privacy shell.” Such calls are important, although they may seem fanciful in a country where a civil servant was handed a 3 year jail sentence for penning a short satirical poem about the president.
The ANHRI has, for some time, worked as a defender of freedom of expression across the Arab world, and the defending the rights of bloggers has become a major part of their work. Their legal stand concludes with a timely reminder on the importance of protecting freedom of expression as a basic human right: “Finally , It should be taken into account that restricting freedom of expression has more negative consequences that misusing freedom of expression.”
In this crazy world where all too many people are so quick to take offense at the slightest criticism, and in the Arab world where governments are equally quick to haul away bloggers for interrogation, this legal paper is a timely call for common sense to prevail, and for that the ANHRI should be thanked.
Labels: ANHRI, Bikya Masr, blog, Egypt
Posts
