Snippets from the EGP Manifesto : (3) A digital Bill of Rights

Digital Rights and Responsibilities

 

The Greens in the European Parliament are at the forefront of the fight for digital rights. We helped stop the Anti-Counterfeit Trade Agreement (ACTA) and we are fighting for strong protection of personal data, for the right to privacy and for strict net neutrality. Now it is time to defend and protect both European citizens and the internet from pervasive corporate and governmental surveillance and to safeguard fundamental rights in the digital age. Personal data belongs to individual citizens, not to companies or governments. Privacy must be respected. The data retention law, which obliges telecom providers to store data about whom citizens communicate with, is a serious mistake and must be abolished.*   Governments have to abide by their own laws. Whilst national security is important, personal freedoms and liberties must not be overridden. Governments must ensure that national security agencies work for all citizens to secure freedom and liberty for everybody. (EGP 2014 Manifesto section entitled  : A Digital Bill of Rights).

 

* The European Court of Justice has early in April 2014 declared as invalid the Data Retention Directive.

Advertisements

4 comments on “Snippets from the EGP Manifesto : (3) A digital Bill of Rights

  1. the other parties namely the one in government all try to invade our privacy as in asking for personal details from facebook etc so for sure we cannot see them fighting for this right at all!!

  2. National security is more important for the common good than the right for individual individual for personal data. Naturally a balance should be preferably attained, but unless national security, which involves all individuals, is safeguarded, the right for individual protection of data can protect criminals from every aspect, including terrorism!

    • Personal freedom is never less important than national security. It is very difficult to attain a perfect balance, but it is always best to err in favour of the rights of the individual.

      • Disagree. Erring in favour of the rights of an individual (could be terrorist, criminal, etc) could be detrimental to rights of many other individuals, amongst which is life itself, which its the greatest of human rights. This is a case of choosing the least evil of two evils, which is a moral concept.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s