VB: [iindep-hub] Will the Ombudsman rise to the occassion?
Apropå att dra slipsten, det här är enligt mig det viktigaste caset det här seklet. Om ombudsmannen fipplar bort detta så fipplas hela meningen med EU bort. Erik Josefsson BE GSM: +32484082063 SE GSM: +46707696567 ----- Forwarded message ----- Från: "Ante Wessels" <ante@ffii.org> Till: "iindep info exchange hub" <hub@iindep.org> Rubrik: [iindep-hub] Will the Ombudsman rise to the occassion? Datum: ons, okt 23, 2013 18:59 Will the Ombudsman rise to the occassion? http://acta.ffii.org/?p=1956 with links October 23, 2013 By Ante A few weeks ago I filed a complaint with the Ombudsman against the European Parliament over the secrecy of legal advice regarding ACTA. The Ombudsman replied that she didn’t want to investigate the complaint as I already got access to the documents (unofficially released versions). In a letter I ask her to reconsider the decision, as the decision seems not in line with an earlier Ombudsman decision, and, more importantly, an investigation could be of major importance. Key paragraphs: "The secrecy surrounding international negotiations is very problematic. For instance, the secrecy surrounding ACTA (Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement) led to various European Parliament resolutions, two Ombudsman complaints and a Court case. All these cases failed, as the "protection of the public interest as regards international relations" exception to openness has an "absolute" character. Once successfully invoked, the Institution does not have to balance it with the public interest in disclosure. The Parliament even raised this international relations exception, that has such a devastating effect on openness, for legal advice it produced itself after the negotiations. This extends the brute force of the international relations exception beyond reasonable scope. The Parliament uses the international relations exception to negate landmark EU Court of Justice Turco case law on legal advice. In my complaint I challenge this over-extension by arguing that the Parliament erred in law. Challenging this over-extension and defending the landmark Turco case law on legal advice is of major importance. Furthermore, I challenge the "absolute" character of the international relations exception by pointing out it is not compatible with human rights. If this reasoning finds acceptance, it may break the absolute character of the exception. It could lead to more open negotiations of international agreements. This would be of major importance too." The letter (pdf) ___________________________________________________________________________ iindep info hub - hub@iindep.org - https://listes.globenet.org/listinfo/hub policy: * do NOT forward mails or non-public information from this list * new subscribers must be approved by a list member * messages from non-members addresses are bounced back list admin is Nil (mailto:hub-owner@iindep.org, he rarely reads the list)
Hej listan, "How deep does the rabbit hole go?" (Det är en retorisk fråga). Så "vi" (jag är en vanlig medborgare) styrs av lagar som ingen som inte ens än de mest kvalificerade experterna kan förstå. Det känns tryggt... "Folket" måste skyddas från sig självt = Sekretess. Stort demokratiskt underskott... Mig det tycks vara (a la Stjärnornas krig) /19x20* *(Nej, 19x20 har inget med jonas att göra och jonas har ingenting med Jonas Sissokho att göra och nej 19x20, jonas, Jonas Sissokho har ingenting med resurface.se att göra och viktigast av allt: 19x20@resurface.se och jonas@resurface.se har ABSOLUT ingenting med varandra att göra.) On 2013-10-23 19:17, Erik Josefsson wrote:
Apropå att dra slipsten, det här är enligt mig det viktigaste caset det här seklet.
Om ombudsmannen fipplar bort detta så fipplas hela meningen med EU bort.
Erik Josefsson BE GSM: +32484082063 SE GSM: +46707696567
----- Forwarded message ----- Från: "Ante Wessels" <ante@ffii.org> Till: "iindep info exchange hub" <hub@iindep.org> Rubrik: [iindep-hub] Will the Ombudsman rise to the occassion? Datum: ons, okt 23, 2013 18:59
Will the Ombudsman rise to the occassion? http://acta.ffii.org/?p=1956 with links
October 23, 2013 By Ante
A few weeks ago I filed a complaint with the Ombudsman against the European Parliament over the secrecy of legal advice regarding ACTA. The Ombudsman replied that she didn’t want to investigate the complaint as I already got access to the documents (unofficially released versions). In a letter I ask her to reconsider the decision, as the decision seems not in line with an earlier Ombudsman decision, and, more importantly, an investigation could be of major importance.
Key paragraphs:
"The secrecy surrounding international negotiations is very problematic. For instance, the secrecy surrounding ACTA (Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement) led to various European Parliament resolutions, two Ombudsman complaints and a Court case.
All these cases failed, as the "protection of the public interest as regards international relations" exception to openness has an "absolute" character. Once successfully invoked, the Institution does not have to balance it with the public interest in disclosure.
The Parliament even raised this international relations exception, that has such a devastating effect on openness, for legal advice it produced itself after the negotiations. This extends the brute force of the international relations exception beyond reasonable scope. The Parliament uses the international relations exception to negate landmark EU Court of Justice Turco case law on legal advice. In my complaint I challenge this over-extension by arguing that the Parliament erred in law. Challenging this over-extension and defending the landmark Turco case law on legal advice is of major importance.
Furthermore, I challenge the "absolute" character of the international relations exception by pointing out it is not compatible with human rights. If this reasoning finds acceptance, it may break the absolute character of the exception. It could lead to more open negotiations of international agreements. This would be of major importance too."
The letter (pdf) ___________________________________________________________________________ iindep info hub - hub@iindep.org - https://listes.globenet.org/listinfo/hub policy: * do NOT forward mails or non-public information from this list * new subscribers must be approved by a list member * messages from non-members addresses are bounced back list admin is Nil (mailto:hub-owner@iindep.org, he rarely reads the list)
-- DFRI-listan är öppen för alla. Listan arkiveras och publiceras öppet på internet. http://dir.gmane.org/gmane.org.user-groups.dfri
AT4AM-projektet är ett litet litet ljus i mörkret: ut med EP på internet och in med internet i EP. Men det har inte hänt nåt på rätt länge så jag vet inte riktigt om det är nån mening att hoppas: https://at4am.eu/pipermail/at4am/ Det kanske går att fixa på annat sätt: http://epfsug.eu/wws/arc/epfsug/2013-09/msg00113.html För det är lite väl tungrott att behöva vänta 8 månader på ett ACTA-dokument. Det ser inte bättre ut än att the current system is not only broken, but also contracting. Och att we need software tools to support a public re-construction of the non-public decision making process. Håhåjaja. //Erik On 10/27/2013 08:56 PM, 19x20 wrote:
Hej listan,
"How deep does the rabbit hole go?" (Det är en retorisk fråga).
Så "vi" (jag är en vanlig medborgare) styrs av lagar som ingen som inte ens än de mest kvalificerade experterna kan förstå. Det känns tryggt...
"Folket" måste skyddas från sig självt = Sekretess.
Stort demokratiskt underskott... Mig det tycks vara (a la Stjärnornas krig)
/19x20*
*(Nej, 19x20 har inget med jonas att göra och jonas har ingenting med Jonas Sissokho att göra och nej 19x20, jonas, Jonas Sissokho har ingenting med resurface.se att göra och viktigast av allt: 19x20@resurface.se och jonas@resurface.se har ABSOLUT ingenting med varandra att göra.)
On 2013-10-23 19:17, Erik Josefsson wrote:
Apropå att dra slipsten, det här är enligt mig det viktigaste caset det här seklet.
Om ombudsmannen fipplar bort detta så fipplas hela meningen med EU bort.
Erik Josefsson BE GSM: +32484082063 SE GSM: +46707696567
----- Forwarded message ----- Från: "Ante Wessels" <ante@ffii.org> Till: "iindep info exchange hub" <hub@iindep.org> Rubrik: [iindep-hub] Will the Ombudsman rise to the occassion? Datum: ons, okt 23, 2013 18:59
Will the Ombudsman rise to the occassion? http://acta.ffii.org/?p=1956 with links
October 23, 2013 By Ante
A few weeks ago I filed a complaint with the Ombudsman against the European Parliament over the secrecy of legal advice regarding ACTA. The Ombudsman replied that she didn’t want to investigate the complaint as I already got access to the documents (unofficially released versions). In a letter I ask her to reconsider the decision, as the decision seems not in line with an earlier Ombudsman decision, and, more importantly, an investigation could be of major importance.
Key paragraphs:
"The secrecy surrounding international negotiations is very problematic. For instance, the secrecy surrounding ACTA (Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement) led to various European Parliament resolutions, two Ombudsman complaints and a Court case.
All these cases failed, as the "protection of the public interest as regards international relations" exception to openness has an "absolute" character. Once successfully invoked, the Institution does not have to balance it with the public interest in disclosure.
The Parliament even raised this international relations exception, that has such a devastating effect on openness, for legal advice it produced itself after the negotiations. This extends the brute force of the international relations exception beyond reasonable scope. The Parliament uses the international relations exception to negate landmark EU Court of Justice Turco case law on legal advice. In my complaint I challenge this over-extension by arguing that the Parliament erred in law. Challenging this over-extension and defending the landmark Turco case law on legal advice is of major importance.
Furthermore, I challenge the "absolute" character of the international relations exception by pointing out it is not compatible with human rights. If this reasoning finds acceptance, it may break the absolute character of the exception. It could lead to more open negotiations of international agreements. This would be of major importance too."
The letter (pdf) ___________________________________________________________________________
iindep info hub - hub@iindep.org - https://listes.globenet.org/listinfo/hub policy: * do NOT forward mails or non-public information from this list * new subscribers must be approved by a list member * messages from non-members addresses are bounced back list admin is Nil (mailto:hub-owner@iindep.org, he rarely reads the list)
-- Erik Josefsson Advisor on Internet Policies Greens/EFA Group <http://www.greens-efa.eu/36-details/josefsson-erik-138.html> GSM: *+32484082063* BXL: PHS 04C075 TEL: +3222832667 SBG: WIC M03005 TEL: +33388173776
Inte menat på det viset:
För det är lite väl tungrott att behöva vänta 8 månader på ett ACTA-dokument. Det är en viktig sak! De frågorna som bedrivs här och på många andra ställen borde/men kan inte? göras av de "fria" medierna.
Extrem komplexitet/teknikalitet. Det behöver belysas = bra. Dåligt = alla dessa system, kontrollfunktioner, lagar, funktionärer är väl ändå menade att tjäna allmänheten? Alla system är byggda av ngn, om de inte fungerar; bygg om dem! Det övergripande systemet; Staten, EU ska tjäna medborgarna på det mest effektiva sättet. Om systemet är ineffektivt, renkonfigurera systemet. Sist: transparens det är ja/nej. Nej, alla dokument kan inte vara tillgängliga men det är inte samma sak som transparens. Sist: Jag har följt försöken på listan (stort tack och i enlighet med DFRI menar jag) med stort intresse och lika stor del av oro. Vi är en mkt liten organisation (med förhållandevis) stor kunskap och förmåga men i EU bor det + 500 000 000 invånare som kanske inte har tid att dryfta ämnen på en e-postlista eller kanske inte har tillgång till internet (1 000 000 i se säger det). 1 kap. Statsskickets grunder 1 § All offentlig makt i Sverige utgår från folket. 2 § Den offentliga makten ska utövas med respekt för alla människors lika värde och för den enskilda människans frihet och värdighet. Det är inte självklart. /19x20 jodå det är Jonas On 2013-10-27 23:04, JOSEFSSON Erik wrote:
AT4AM-projektet är ett litet litet ljus i mörkret: ut med EP på internet och in med internet i EP.
Men det har inte hänt nåt på rätt länge så jag vet inte riktigt om det är nån mening att hoppas:
https://at4am.eu/pipermail/at4am/
Det kanske går att fixa på annat sätt:
http://epfsug.eu/wws/arc/epfsug/2013-09/msg00113.html
För det är lite väl tungrott att behöva vänta 8 månader på ett ACTA-dokument.
Det ser inte bättre ut än att the current system is not only broken, but also contracting.
Och att we need software tools to support a public re-construction of the non-public decision making process.
Håhåjaja.
//Erik
On 10/27/2013 08:56 PM, 19x20 wrote:
Hej listan,
"How deep does the rabbit hole go?" (Det är en retorisk fråga).
Så "vi" (jag är en vanlig medborgare) styrs av lagar som ingen som inte ens än de mest kvalificerade experterna kan förstå. Det känns tryggt...
"Folket" måste skyddas från sig självt = Sekretess.
Stort demokratiskt underskott... Mig det tycks vara (a la Stjärnornas krig)
/19x20*
*(Nej, 19x20 har inget med jonas att göra och jonas har ingenting med Jonas Sissokho att göra och nej 19x20, jonas, Jonas Sissokho har ingenting med resurface.se att göra och viktigast av allt: 19x20@resurface.se och jonas@resurface.se har ABSOLUT ingenting med varandra att göra.)
On 2013-10-23 19:17, Erik Josefsson wrote:
Apropå att dra slipsten, det här är enligt mig det viktigaste caset det här seklet.
Om ombudsmannen fipplar bort detta så fipplas hela meningen med EU bort.
Erik Josefsson BE GSM: +32484082063 SE GSM: +46707696567
----- Forwarded message ----- Från: "Ante Wessels" <ante@ffii.org> Till: "iindep info exchange hub" <hub@iindep.org> Rubrik: [iindep-hub] Will the Ombudsman rise to the occassion? Datum: ons, okt 23, 2013 18:59
Will the Ombudsman rise to the occassion? http://acta.ffii.org/?p=1956 with links
October 23, 2013 By Ante
A few weeks ago I filed a complaint with the Ombudsman against the European Parliament over the secrecy of legal advice regarding ACTA. The Ombudsman replied that she didn’t want to investigate the complaint as I already got access to the documents (unofficially released versions). In a letter I ask her to reconsider the decision, as the decision seems not in line with an earlier Ombudsman decision, and, more importantly, an investigation could be of major importance.
Key paragraphs:
"The secrecy surrounding international negotiations is very problematic. For instance, the secrecy surrounding ACTA (Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement) led to various European Parliament resolutions, two Ombudsman complaints and a Court case.
All these cases failed, as the "protection of the public interest as regards international relations" exception to openness has an "absolute" character. Once successfully invoked, the Institution does not have to balance it with the public interest in disclosure.
The Parliament even raised this international relations exception, that has such a devastating effect on openness, for legal advice it produced itself after the negotiations. This extends the brute force of the international relations exception beyond reasonable scope. The Parliament uses the international relations exception to negate landmark EU Court of Justice Turco case law on legal advice. In my complaint I challenge this over-extension by arguing that the Parliament erred in law. Challenging this over-extension and defending the landmark Turco case law on legal advice is of major importance.
Furthermore, I challenge the "absolute" character of the international relations exception by pointing out it is not compatible with human rights. If this reasoning finds acceptance, it may break the absolute character of the exception. It could lead to more open negotiations of international agreements. This would be of major importance too."
The letter (pdf) ___________________________________________________________________________
iindep info hub - hub@iindep.org - https://listes.globenet.org/listinfo/hub policy: * do NOT forward mails or non-public information from this list * new subscribers must be approved by a list member * messages from non-members addresses are bounced back list admin is Nil (mailto:hub-owner@iindep.org, he rarely reads the list)
-- Erik Josefsson Advisor on Internet Policies Greens/EFA Group <http://www.greens-efa.eu/36-details/josefsson-erik-138.html> GSM: *+32484082063* BXL: PHS 04C075 TEL: +3222832667 SBG: WIC M03005 TEL: +33388173776
-- DFRI-listan är öppen för alla. Listan arkiveras och publiceras öppet på internet. http://dir.gmane.org/gmane.org.user-groups.dfri
participants (3)
-
19x20 -
Erik Josefsson -
JOSEFSSON Erik