Malawi: Missing out on online technology for transparency

By Tsering

Flickr Creative Commons | Michiel Van Balen

By Victor Kaonga | Global Voices Online | August 16, 2010

If there is one online tool that has attracted many Malawians, then it is Facebook. It appears to be the “in thing” for many who are increasingly accessing the Internet. Then there are tweets. In the 2009 presidential and parliamentary elections, Twitter was heavily used for the first time to share developments in Malawi. The same applies to blogs — at least a hundred and fifty Malawians have personal online diaries. Such new media tools help “net” citizens connect with others throughout the world, enabling online civic engagement. While Malawi seems to be doing well in terms of online social networks, it has yet to make progress in using these tools for transparency and accountability.

The fight against corruption

When Malawi became a multiparty democracy in 1994, words like transparency and accountability became buzzwords in both public and civil society. As a result, the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) was born out of a 1995 constitutional provision that emphasized the need to introduce measures to “guarantee accountability, transparency, personal integrity and financial probity and which by virtue of their effectiveness and transparency will strengthen confidence in public institutions.”

Malawi has made strides in the fight against corruption using several approaches. In Transparency International’s 2009 Corruption Perceptions Index, which measures the perceived level of public sector corruption, Malawi ranked 89 out of 180 countries and territories. This was step up from previous indices.

Some countries have seen technologies for transparency help them in the fight against corruption, strengthening the credibility of governments and helping with their provision of public services. Having picked a lesson or two and joining the information highway, the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) in Malawi recently upgraded its website, a development that the bureau secretary Tokha Manyungwa described as “a big step in enlisting online support in the fight corruption.”

Asked why the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) has taken so long in having a functional website, he said that among other issues, “the main reason was capacity problems in the ACB’s ICT section mainly due to staff turn over in the section.” One can appreciate the challenges with the bureau since this is a government-funded institution where bureaucracy is involved.

The website upgrade means that for the first time, Malawians are able to report any corrupt practices by using the web. However, it is clear that the bureau is far from being online-friendly. Compared to other anti-corruption websites in the sub-Saharan Africa (e.g., the Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission and South Africa’s Special Investigating Unit), the site needs further tools if it is to enable people to easily report on and follow corrupt practices. The site can only be used by those who are able to understand and read English and this may discriminate against those who cannot use the language.

Challenges to technology for transparency

The danger with many other transparency initiatives linked to governments is that their sites contain too much raw information, much of which does not make sense to a common citizen. Some of it is irrelevant, inaccessible, irregular and inaccurate. From what I know about people in Malawi, few people can manage to read through large amounts online information. This would therefore not only affect participation of the people in the fight against corruption but also kill the transparency initiative.

According to the Malawi Communications Regulatory Authority (MACRA), Internet penetration is growing by the day through hot-spot services by ISPs and mobile phone operators who have since introduced affordable internet services. Still, the Internet is a new development in Malawi.

Apart from procedural issues regarding technological initiatives, there is also a problem with what I would call “Internet will.” There are still many public servants who have yet to appreciate the role the Internet and new media play for development, let alone transparency. For instance, the Malawian government began its Government Wide Area Network (GWAN) project in 2003, but the project is not yet fully functioning. The GWAN’s main objective is to provide government officers with a computer network that is secure and available at all times in order for the officers to access relevant information in a cost effective manner that will save government hard-earned money. This is supposed to be at the center of the government’s administrative system.

At a broader level, technology for transparency projects will have to deal with Malawi’s current level of e-readiness, which is understandably low. According to a study published by the United Nations (PDF), Malawi’s national leaders need to “be sure about the state of E-readiness for their own country, what needs to be changed, what barriers exist, and often fail to see the benefits of such changes.” Malawi rates low when it comes to the electronic climate on transparency and electronic awareness of leaders.

Civil society and transparency initiatives

Civil society has a key role in developing and using online technologies to promote transparency, accountability and civic engagement. Unfortunately, this is still work in progress. Sometimes some of the civil society initiatives are seen with suspicion by the government.

The Malawi Economic Justice Network, which is implementing the DFID-funded Governance and Transparency Fund, says it is yet to introduce online technologies to assist in achieving transparency. Launched in November 2008, the project aims at “Strengthening Citizen Demand for Good Governance Through Evidence Based Approaches.” It is not clear what aspects will be online and indeed to what extent.

A media expert and keen follower of the digitalization developments in Malawi, Baldwin Chiyamwaka, said that Malawi is still far away from utilizing online technologies to promote transparency and accountability. He pointed out that “most public institutions have no capacity to develop effective ICT infrastructure,” adding that “there is still a strong inclination and preference for traditional means information management.”

Chiyamwaka, who heads the Media Council of Malawi, observed that Malawi’s legal framework is an obstacle its own right to transparency initiatives. “The current legal framework does not allow sharing of information and let alone making it public. Public policy prohibits publicizing public information,” he noted. Chiyamwaka further explained that a common reality in Malawi is that “most public officers are skeptical about online technologies. They feel it is not safe and secure means of sharing information.” Clearly the battles for transparency in Malawi are big.

Hope for online transparency projects

It has to be noted though that there are multiple challenges in Malawi for technology for transparency projects. Poor Internet infrastructure, technophobia, high connection and connectivity costs, the lack of ICT policy in some countries, and inadequate knowledge and ICT personnel all constitute obstacles to the use of technology for transparency.

Malawi has lack of economic and technical resources in addition to a lack of funding and well trained personnel to creatively keep the transparency battle afloat. A visit to several websites run by civil society organizations involved in transparency, civic engagement and election issues reveals frequent lapses in updating the content of the sites, which is linked to inadequate funds and the shortage of personnel.

There is need to promote usage of online technologies in the country, especially among top public servants and professionals in the civil society. One may find it disappointing to see how little or inadequate information about Malawi is available online. Malawians have a free online environment where issues of control and censorship do not really arise as it is in some countries. On this, Global Voices co-founder Ethan Zuckerman strongly advised Malawians to speak out using online tools on issues that affect them and are about Malawi. He promised to further amplify such voices using Global Voices Online. “Our project seeks to aggregate, curate, and amplifies the global conversation online, shining light on places and people other media often ignore. We would love to get more stories from and about Malawi whether in English, Chichewa or any local language, and we will share such with the rest of the world. Your stories need to be heard,” said Zuckerman in an interview.

Though Malawi is yet to plug into some local and regional online networks, there is hope that with more “Internet will,” it will reap benefits of technologies on transparency. For instance, it can tap into the Africa I-Parliaments Action Plan, an Africa-wide initiative implemented by the UN/DESA to empower African Parliaments to better fulfill their democratic functions by supporting their efforts to become open, participatory, knowledge-based and learning organizations.

Conclusion

Though in many sub-Saharan African countries, it is the NGOs that are pushing for the use of technology in their advocacy for transparency, there is need for other stakeholders — e.g., government, ICT professionals, academicians, etc. — to take the leading role in using the online technologies.

Such challenges impinge on a country’s ability to plug into online technologies that would promote transparency, accountability and civic engagement. It is encouraging, though, that the era of multiparty democracy has ignited people’s desire to start demanding transparency and accountability from those they elected.

The reality is that if an individual or a country is not plugged into the information highway, they only have themselves to blame, as they will belong to the museum of history when it comes to modern communication, aid transparency and accountability.

India: From Stone Pelting In Kashmir Streets To Facebook Protests

By Tsering

Flickr Creative Commons | Tanvir Kohli

By Rezwan | Global Voices Online | July 18, 2010

The beautiful Kashmir Region is marred with territorial conflicts between India, Pakistan and China since the British colonial rulers left India in 1947. Amidst a few wars all these countries have made claims to different parts of Kashmir, based on historical developments and religious affiliations of the Kashmiri people.

The Jammu and Kashmir region is administered by India but enjoys special autonomy under Article 370 of the Constitution of India. It is also the only Indian state that has its own flag. Since the late 1980s a violent uprising backed by Pakistan has caused a prolonged, bloody conflict between militants and the Indian security forces in this region. The Indian Army in Jammu and Kashmir has been given special powers via Armed Forces Act, which has been widely criticized.Kashmir is boiling over tension and rage since early June when it was revealed that Indian security forces allegedly killed three innocent boys and claimed they were militants. Violent protests ensued which brought part of the region in standstill and hundreds of Kashmiri youths were arrested. Jason Oberdorf at Global Post explains the recent volatile situation in Jammu and Kashmir:

Late Tuesday (July 6, 2010) night, New Delhi deployed the army to quell protests in Kashmir for the first time since 1990, after police bullets allegedly killed three more civilians, bringing the total for the month to 15. [..]

Facebook and other social networking sites are brimming with outpourings of rage, bordering on hatred for India’s security forces, from Kashmiri youth.

Reading reports about Kashmir may get tricky depending on the source. While a Pakistani media would interpret the stone pelting protests with headlines such as “Kashmir shuts down protesting Indian occupation: Want freedom, Pakistan“, an Indian media would label the stone pelting as provocations by anti-national elements. There are reports that the Indian media may be allegedly fabricating blames.Apart from tackling the stone throwing protesters the Indian military now faces a new form of insurgency. Protesters are increasingly using social media tools like Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, hi5, Orkut and Kashmir Friend, which is a social network dedicated to the people of Kashmir. Simantik Dowerah at Live Mint reports that “there are actually groups of Kashmiri stone throwers who have registered themselves on Facebook.” The Kashmir reports with screenshots how the youths are being instigated by sharing Jihadi videos.As the violence escalated, the Jammu and Kashmir Government banned the SMS service across the valley in an attempt to stop the flow of information and rumors. But the Kashmiris could breathe free, stay connected and share information via Facebook as Hindustan Times reported. Many news websites like Kashmir Dispatch and Kashmir are using Facebook to reach netizens.

Amidst all this there are reports that Facebook users are being screened by Police. The Daily Rising Kashmir reports that the authorities have now started scrutinizing Facebook users in South Kashmir’s Anantnag (previously Islamabad) district who they claim are ‘instigating’ people against the state.Sagar From Srinagar writes in protest in his blog “Tragedy Of Errors: My Kashmir”, which sums up the pain of the Kashmiris:

I protest for the incompetency of the people handling my future, I protest for the lack of humanity in our (in)security forces, I Protest for the repeated insults, I protest for media using my pain for their TRPs, I protest for the short sightedness of all our leaders, I protest for none of them coming out submissively and asking for forgiveness, I protest for being ordered to be locked up in my house for no fault of mine, I protest for anyone, but never a Kashmiri, getting his 5 minutes of fame on tv, I protest for the unnecessary and insensitive comments made about my place, I protest for journalists telling the world just one side of the story…

Being Cynical at Desicritics blames the policies and politics as a reason for the protests:

Traditionally Kashmiris feel alienated- thanks to our policies and our politician’s attitude to keep the Kashmir topic alive for their own gain. If you look at the video footage, it is really disturbing to see teenagers barely in their twenties are hurling stones at the security forces. On a micro analysis you would realize that these are the same guys who would have born when Kashmir was at peak of it’s boiling point and their whole life till now has gone through violence, atrocities, negligence, no governance and of course the terrorists. [..]

I am sure the majority of these teenagers who are seen protesting violently might not be knowing for what they are protesting or on whom they are pelting stones.Some analysts are labeling these protests as the ‘new Intifada’. Arjimand Hussain Talib at Dateline Srinagar opines about the protests of Kashmiri youths:

Their movement will not die down because this generation is dynamic – stretches across the globe. It has technology at its hand – Internet, mobiles phones, digital cameras, You Tube, Facebook, etc. They are archiving Kashmir’s current happenings for the next generation. And are disseminating that to the world beyond to catch attention.

There are reports that the local government is trying to control the flow of information by shutting down publications and confiscating newspapers prior to distribution. Journalists are being barred from reporting on demonstrations. The world will rely on Facebook and Twitter users for first hand reports from the region. But after the SMS ban will the Jammu and Kashmir government crack down on Social networks too?

Rwanda: Paul Kagame Supporters Turn to Power of Twitter, Facebook and Blogs

By Tsering

Flickr Creative Commons | David Shankbone

By Ndesanjo Macha | Global Voices Online | July 14, 2010

Supporters of the president Paul Kagame of Rwanda have turned to the power of Facebook, Twitter and blogs to help him win presidential election that will be held on 9 August 2010.

MyKagame is an online fan club for Paul Kagame. This is what the club is all about:

As a career statesman with a rich profile and long list of accomplishments, President Paul Kagame has a large following of admirers who look up to look up to him for guidance as Hero. This is their platform. The Fan Club is managed entirely by the president’s fans as a group with a common cause, purpose and direction.

As a fan of President Kagame, this August campaign is about you. Your voice counts. This is your platform to share thoughts and advise on issues to address during and after the presidential elections. Stand up for what you believe in, make Rwanda proud!

You may get involved in several ways:

Connecting with other supporters through Fan Club blogs.

Joining grassroots efforts to support the President’s campaign

Spreading the word about the Fan Club and our Hero’s agenda for Rwanda especially during the upcoming Presidential campaign.

Boosting morale of people who share our values and love Rwanda.

In addition to its website, the club has a blog. Following are two recent posts on the blogs:

1. Rwanda’s strides to build a regional ICT hub:

Rwanda has positioned itself as a regional hub for information and communication technology (ICT) with a robust ICT industry, including e-commerce, e-services, applications development, and automation. It is believed that ICT will be harnessed to generate wealth and be a key economic driver. As part of its policy goal to progressively transform Rwanda from a predominantly agriculture economy to a predominantly information-rich, knowledge-based economy (PIKE), the Government committed itself to the implementation of the envisaged four rolling NICI/ICT4D Plans over the 20 year life-span of Vision 2020 and the ICT4D Policy.

2. Our hero is cleared by NEC to contest:

As highly expected by the fans, President Paul Kagame was among the four candidates cleared yesterday by the The National Electoral Commission to contest in the August 09 poll.

NEC has accepted Kagame’s application for the race after the RPF returned as its flag bearer to run for the second and final term as provided for by in the constitution.

For this term, President Kagame has pledged to put leadership in the hands of the people. It will strengthen further the integration of the youth, women, vulnerable groups and the civil society. He also promises to fortify the means of disseminating information and consolidate the country’s security and sovereignty

There is a Facebook page called Paul Kagame will win 2010 presidential elections. At the time of writing this post there were 3,408 followeres. Following are a few messages on its wall:

Moses Ndayisenga says:

May God bless Rwanda’s paul kagame in his victory b’se he won 2010 election.VIVA KPAUL. OUR Mzee

Siriba AbdulKarim says:

May God be with you in leading Rwandans to their social welfare. Keep it up!

Sangano Gentle adds:

Yes our beloved PRESIDENt is gonna win 2010 ELECTION.no one like him.

There are two other Facebook pages for Kagame; PaulKagame with 6,327 followers and Paul Kagame with 8,169 followers (at the time of writing this post).

The latest message on PaulKagame page reads:

today co-chaired the meeting of the Broadband Commission for Digital Development held in Geneva, Switzerland.
In his remarks said “… There
is no doubt, that using Broadband to unleash peoples’ full potential is an
economic imperative for attaining an inclusive and prosperous global economic
society…Leaders in governmen…t, business and civil society organizations must be accountable to achieve concrete results.”

A speech by Paul Kagame at the 16th Commemoration of The Genocide is the latest message on Paul Kagame page.

One of the topics on the page is about the administrator/creator of the page. There were fears that the administrator may have passed away without the knowledge of his followers:

Mukiza I have this feeling that the anonymous admin for this page may have silently met his or her creator without our knowledge.
For what explains the fact that this page has gone non-updated since august of 2009.
That is a hell of a long time for a live person to be that un-responsive.

If my worries are founded,then my sincere condolences are guaranteed.

The administrator joined the discussion explaining his silence:

Paul Kagame Still kicking, I’m afraid

I recently moved cities and have been largely without the internet for the past 3 months as well as splitting up with my partner of over a year. I’m sorry for neglecting you, but I still check in whenever I can. Unfortunately even admins are human.

If anyone has any complaints all they have to do is make a topic and I’ll see it.

As for the page, well it seems to take care of itself pretty much, or so it seems to me. But I’ll do some spring cleaning.

But maybe I’ve grabbed the wrong end of the stick here, is this a coup? Would the community like me to step down?

~ The Administrator

Kagame supporters are also on the popular microblogging site, Twitter. There is paulkagame, which is private (196 followers) and PaulKagame with 964 followers.

The latest tweet on PaulKagame reads:

in Eastern Province yesterday, commended success of land distribution and agricultural surplus -pledged more government support

There is also Paul Kagame photostream on Flickr and Paul Kagame podcast and pK blogs on paulkagame.com

We will have to wait and see the overall impact of social media in the 2010 presidential election in Rwanda.

China Renews Google’s License

By Tsering

Flickr Creative Commons | Craig Maccubbin

By David Barboza | The New York Times | July 9, 2010

SHANGHAI — The Internet giant Google said Friday that the Beijing government had renewed its license to operate a Web site in mainland China, ending months of tension after the company stopped censoring search results here and moved some operations out of the country.

Google made the announcement early Friday morning in California in a blog posting by its chief legal officer, David Drummond.

“We are very pleased that the government has renewed our I.C.P. license,” Mr. Drummond wrote referring to an Internet content provider license. “And we look forward to continuing to provide Web search and local products to our users in China.”

Google’s chief executive, Eric E. Schmidt, said Friday that the renewal “was the outcome we were hoping for.”

Mr. Schmidt, who told reporters on Thursday that the company expected to obtain the renewal, said that he did not know China’s decision would come so soon and was informed of the decision early Friday. He had expected the decision to come down within 24 to 48 hours.

“We’ll keep doing what we’re doing, and they’ll keep doing what they’re doing,” he said Friday at the Allen & Company media conference in Sun Valley, Idaho.

If the license had not been renewed, Google would have effectively been forced to shut down its Web site, google.cn, in China. With the renewal, however, Google can continue offering limited services in China and direct users to the company’s uncensored Hong Kong-based Chinese language search engine, google.com.hk. Hong Kong, a former British colony that is now a special administrative region of China, is governed separately from the mainland. Under the current setup in mainland China, users can conduct a Google search and see the results, but often they cannot open the links.

The license renewal is a sign that Google, while uncomfortable with operating in China and censoring its search results on Beijing’s behalf, is determined to keep a foot in China, which now has more Internet users than the United States.

Google announced in January that it had suffered China-based cyberattacks on its databases and the e-mail accounts of some users. The company said it would also stop censoring search results, which it had agreed to do when it first began to operate in China several years ago. The Chinese government insists that its citizens’ access to the Internet be stripped of offensive and some politically sensitive material.

In March, Google closed its Internet search service in China and began directing users to the uncensored Hong Kong site.

Many analysts were stunned by the moves and questioned whether Google was acting prudently in risking its spot in the world’s largest Internet market.

Just a few weeks ago, however, Google signaled a softer approach to Beijing by saying that it had stopped automatically sending users in mainland China to its Hong Kong site. The company said it had created a Web page that offered users in mainland China a choice, rather than automatically directing them to its Hong Kong site.

The move, though seemingly insignificant, seemed to comply better with Beijing’s strict regulations.

“This approach ensures we stay true to our commitment not to censor our results on google.cn and gives users access to all of our services from one page,” Mr. Drummond wrote at the time.

Renewal is required annually for Google’s license, which officially expires in 2012.

“This is a reasonable move by the government,” Jake Li, an Internet analyst at Guotai Junan Securities in Shenzhen, told Bloomberg News. “Google has brought itself into compliance with regulations, so there’s no good reason to deny them the license.”

Even before the censorship issue came to the fore, Google was struggling in China to attain the same market dominance it has achieved in many other countries.

The hottest Internet companies in China are those like Baidu, Tencent and Alibaba — fast-growing local companies that are making huge profits.

Google is not the only American giant that has had trouble in China. Yahoo and eBay have failed to gain significant traction here. And Facebook, Twitter and YouTube are blocked by the government.

Lebanese Facebook Users Arrested for Defaming President

By Tsering

Flickr Creative Commons | Steven Damron

 By Sarah Hamdi | OpenNet Initiative | July 6, 2010

On June 28th, The Guardian, Menassat, L’Orient Le Jour, and the AFP reported that Lebanon arrested 3 individuals (Naim George Hanna, Antoine Youssef Ramia, Shebel Rajeh Qasab), and Prosecutor General Saeed Mirza issued an arrest warrant for a fourth (Ahmed Ali Shuman). They were all students in their early 20’s, and were placed under arrest for slander and defamation of President Michel Suleiman on Facebook. Currently, the first three have been released on bail of 100,000 L.L. each ($66.65 USD) and are expected to be tried later in Beirut with no news of the fourth suspect, according to NOW Lebanon.

Their posts are no longer available on Facebook (the AFP indicates that they were removed). No notice about who removed them is available – whether it was Facebook, an individual/the authors, or another institution is unknown. However, the Guardian reports that the comments, which were re-posted on President Suleiman’s official Facebook fan page included harmless gems like “You’re worth my foot,” “you’re like a snake; all you do is from under the table,” and “the king of racism and sectarianism.”

In an open letter to the President, blogger pinkfloyed rightfully expressed outrage that the government chose to waste resources on this, considering all the other domestic issues worth of governmental attention and action, such as widespread poverty and Israeli military presence in Lebanon. In protest, a petition has been circulating online, to Protect Free Speech in Lebanon, with up to 139 signatures as of July 6th.

However, this is not the first time that Lebanon has harassed a netizen for defaming the President. Threatened Voices reported that on March 15, Lebanese blogger and journalist Khodor Salameh was interrogated by Lebanese security forces and threatened with arrest “unless he changed his tone” regarding criticizing the president.

It is telling that these events occur in the wake of upcoming parliamentary voting on a Lebanese e-Transaction law. The law, which activists fought and succeeded in postponing voting on, would legitimize the surveillance of Internet users through regulation of ISPs, as well as limit their ability to communicate by preventing the use of VOIP services. Government monitoring of bloggers and other Internet users becomes especially concerning in light of these arrests.

While Lebanon is frequently considered liberal in terms of freedom of speech (see the Global Freedom of Speech Index) and contains no evidence of Internet filtering (ONI Country Report), these incidents are significant because they indicate the lack of transparency about the limits of Lebanese liberalism. There is apparently a ceiling that these individuals hit which is not explicitly legally defined, as The Guardian notes: “Since these insults were made online – where Lebanese law doesn’t yet reach – that ceiling is only as high as the president deems appropriate.” This sentiment was further reinforced by Justice Minister Najjar who defended the decision of the Prosecutor when he stated that “media freedom in Lebanon and any civilized country reaches its limits when the content is pure slander and aims at undermining the head of state.”

If the results of this case prove Najjar’s statement right, it might have dire consequences for Lebanese bloggers and other Internet users’ freedom of speech online. This is particularly true if the Lebanese e-Transaction bill gets voted and signed into law, legitimizing government surveillance of Lebanese internet users.

Afghanistan begins Internet filtering with Gmail, Facebook

By Tsering

Flickr Creative Commons | Colleen Taugher

By Rebekah Heacock | OpenNet Initiative | June, 28 2010

Afghanistan has followed up on its promise to begin filtering the Internet: the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) reports the country is now blocking Facebook, Gmail, Twitter, YouTube and a host of sites related to alcohol, gambling and sex.

In March, the government announced its intention to begin filtering the Afghan internet, admitting that it lacked the technology but was investigating ways to block sites related to violence, terrorism, pornography or gambling.

Under the Taliban, Afghan citizens were completely cut off from the Internet. The government banned the Internet in 2001 because it contained “obscene, immoral and anti-Islamic material.” In 2006, fewer than just citizen per thousand had Internet access. The current government has made greater Internet access a priority, and in the past decade the number of Internet users in the country has grown from almost none to around 500,000.

While the proposed filtering plan was billed as part of the war against the Taliban, some worry that the government is reverting to Taliban-era control over online content. In an interview with Public Radio International, the BBC’s Dawood Azami notes that the Afghan media are particularly concerned:

But now the government says that there are some websites which are “immoral” and against the traditions of the Afghan people so they are planning to not only block those websites that glorify violence, but they are also trying or planning to block those websites which the Taliban didn’t like…. [The Afghan press corps] are unhappy about this. They say that if these restrictions are imposed, it would mean that the government would be able to block any website they don’t like, or block those websites which are critical of the government. So there is this concern in the journalist community in Afghanistan.

While the desire to restrict access to pro-violence content is understandable, the government’s decision to block such a wide swath of sites — including, the EFF says, Gmail — is harder to justify as part of an anti-terrorist plan.

Pakistan, Turkey Target Google, Other Sites

By Tsering

Flickr Creative Commons | The Wandering Angel

By Tom Wright, Marc Champion And Amir Efrati | The Wall Street Journal | June 26, 2010 

A move by Pakistan to begin monitoring for anti-Islamic content on major websites—including those run by Google Inc. and Yahoo Inc.—is the latest sign that censorship looms as a threat to Internet companies in a number of countries.

The Pakistan announcement on Friday came a day after a communications minister in Turkey, which has blocked thousands of sites including Google’s YouTube, said the video site was “waging a battle against the Turkish Republic” and suggested that the situation could change if Google were to register and pay taxes.

Authorities in Pakistan on Friday said they would start monitoring major Internet search engines, including Google and Microsoft Corp.’s Bing.com, as well as the e-commerce giant Amazon.com Inc. The move follows an action last month against social-networking site Facebook Inc., which Pakistan blocked for several weeks after it hosted a page in which users could post pictures of the Prophet Muhammad. The portrayal of Muhammad is forbidden by Islam, and the ban was lifted when the site removed the page.

A YouTube spokeswoman said it was aware of the actions announced in Pakistan and said it will work to keep its services accessible there. “Google and YouTube are platforms for free expression, and we try to allow as much content as possible on our services and still ensure that we enforce our content policies,” she said.

She added that the company remains “disappointed” about the continuing ban on YouTube in Turkey “against a safe and lawful international service enjoyed by millions of people around the world.”

Regarding Pakistan’s decision, a Microsoft spokeswoman said, “Government decisions to restrict online content should respect the rights of individual users and be adopted through open, transparent and publicly accountable processes.” A spokeswoman for Yahoo said the company “was founded on the principle that access to information can improve people’s lives, and we are disappointed to learn about the monitoring and possible blocking of our sites in Pakistan.” Amazon declined to comment.

Google and other Internet companies have helped some Asian countries, such as India and China, enforce certain standards online by removing material that governments find objectionable or violate local laws. YouTube blocks access to videos in Thailand that might be seen to insult the king—which is against the law in that country—and Nazi imagery that is illegal in some parts of Europe.

Earlier this year Google stopped self-censoring its Internet search results in China after complaining it had been hit with a cyber attack originating from that country. China’s own Internet filters now censor Google’s searches.

A number of countries in the Islamic world, including Iran and Saudi Arabia, have banned Internet content in the past for being sacrilegious. But those countries have authoritarian governments that closely monitor the Internet and the media. In Pakistan, where Islamists have vied with secular-minded politicians since the country’s creation in 1947, the implementation of such bans is fraught with difficulties.

On Friday it remained unclear how the state-run Pakistan Telecommunication Authority would be able to monitor millions of links on the Internet to ensure blasphemous material wasn’t appearing on sites like Google and Yahoo.

In Turkey, Google has been the most prominent victim of a 2007 law that has resulted in the closure of thousands of websites, putting the government under pressure in recent weeks as newspapers and opposition parties have begun to cry foul over the restrictions being placed on ordinary web users.

In May 2008, a Turkish court shut down access to Google’s YouTube due to material posted on the site that was found to be insulting to the nation’s founder, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk.

Related

U.S. Presses Syria on Web Freedoms

Earlier this year Turkey’s communications ministry extended the ban to other Google sites, a move that appeared to be triggered by a separate tax battle with the U.S. giant. As a result, Turks suddenly lost direct access to GoogleMaps and other sites, as well as to YouTube. However, many ordinary users have been able to circumvent the closures.

The opposition People’s Republican Party, usually a fierce defender of Ataturk’s honor, on Thursday attacked the government in parliament for creating what one parliament member called a “culture of censorship” in the country, including Internet censorship.

Some of Turkey’s top leaders have sought to distance themselves from the Internet closures. President Abdullah Gul earlier this month sent out a public message through his account on micro-blogging site Twitter.com, saying he “cannot approve of Turkey being in the category of countries that bans YouTube [and] prevents access to Google.”
Write to Tom Wright at tom.wright@wsj.com, Marc Champion at marc.champion@wsj.com and Amir Efrati at amir.efrati@wsj.com

Copyright 2009 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Bangladesh lifts Facebook ban

By Tsering

Flickr Creative Commons | John Pavelka

Associated Press | June 7, 2010

DHAKA, Bangladesh — Bangladesh has lifted a weeklong ban on the social networking website Facebook imposed for a page urging people to draw images of Islam’s Prophet Muhammad, an official said Sunday.

Bangladesh become the second South Asian nation after Pakistan to ban the popular site over religious concerns. Pakistan lifted a court-imposed ban last Monday after an information technology official said Facebook officials had apologized for the page deemed offensive to Muslims and removed its contents. (Facebook has denied apologizing or removing the content; it said it was merely blocking access to it to users in certain countries including Pakistan.)

Many Muslims regard depictions of the prophet, even favorable ones, as blasphemous.

The Bangladesh Telecommunications Regulatory Commission ordered access to Facebook restored around midnight Saturday, and the site was available Sunday, said the commission’s chairman, Zia Ahmed.

Facebook had removed the objectionable page, he said. The page could not be accessed in Bangladesh on Sunday.

The ban was imposed because Facebook was carrying caricatures that might hurt the religious sentiments of people in Bangladesh, where about 85 percent of the 150 million people are Muslim, Ahmed said earlier.

The commission said the U.S.-based company also agreed to remove “obnoxious” images of some of the country’s political leaders, including Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and opposition leader Khaleda Zia. The commission did not elaborate.

Nearly 1 million people in Bangladesh use Facebook, according to an estimate by the Bangladesh ISP Association.