"Internet Society" and "Internet Without Borders" denounce censorship. You will recognize them in their works, "says the Holy Bible. The dictator may take the skin of an angel, he ends up letting himself be discovered, in his true nature. From a dictator, there are signs that do not deceive. And they show themselves more than ever in Togo, with Faure Gnassingbe and his minority of profiteers who naively believe that power will remain in their hands ad vitae aeternam. By cutting off the Internet, Togo once again marginalized the civilized countries.
Instead of trying to listen to his people, who reminded him of his broken promises and his dilatory become manifest, the government chose to cut the Internet in Togo. By cutting the network of networks, the government knows that it deprives citizens of a resource that has become vital today. The Internet has become a consumer good and its break or disruption is now considered a violation of human rights.
This censorship, they assume besides, without any embarrassment. One of the stinky jaws of the regime-follow our-looks did not show any embarrassment at this very popular decision. On the contrary, it defended it on a radio of the place pretending that it is to contain threats of security in the country. When they should walk, there was no threat to the Internet being cut off. But it was necessary for the citizens to decide to march in order to express dissatisfaction so that it could be equated with insecurity requiring the implementation of extreme measures. Everyone knows however that only the truth constitutes an insecurity for the regime. Those who think that the Togolese did not have to blush after the death of two people, because elsewhere in Kenya, about ten people were killed, are actually afraid that the images of their atrocities or demonstrations of the people will not be found on the international plane. A real blow of a sword in the water.
Cutting the Internet today is totally counterproductive. It hardly ever achieves the desired objectives. It was not because the Anglophone Cameroon, of the other African dictator, had been deprived of the Internet that the information was no longer coming out or that the populations had abandoned their grievances. Several months of blackout have not been enough to stifle Cameroonians' aspirations for more social justice. Today, with the development of information and communication technologies and with an area as small as that of Togo, it is totally insane to think that Togolese can be prevented from communicating in this 21st century. The dictators always have this in common that they are very much involved in practices that make them a counter-advertisement, but ultimately fail to guarantee them eternal security. On the contrary, this further contributes to strengthening the fronts that oppose them in their determination to get rid of them.
The censorship of power has not failed to provoke reactions within the international organizations that defend digital freedoms. This is the case of "Internet without Borders" which condemned "with the utmost firmness this attack on the online freedom of expression of the Togolese citizens, and urged the Togolese authorities to use the channels in conformity with international law for a balance between the protection of freedoms, including freedom of expression and the preservation of public order ".
Internet Society Togo also reacted to vigorously condemn censorship (see press release).
Moreover, the UN Human Rights Council, in a resolution dated 1 July 2016, which became a reference decision, states "restrictions on access to information on the Internet". Contrary to what Gilbert Bawara claimed on a local radio, the decision to cut the Internet is not a practice of civility that should be boasted on a media. And as with any violation, the perpetrators can go unpunished as long as the system that covers them continues to cover them or to exist. But as we know, even the worst dictatorships in the world have come to an end one day.
EXCERPT FROM THE COUNCIL DECISION
"The Security Council unequivocally condemns measures designed to deliberately prevent or disrupt access to information or the dissemination of information online, in violation of international human rights law, and calls upon all States to to refrain from such practices and to stop them. It stresses the importance of combating calls for hatred that constitute incitement to discrimination or violence on the Internet, in particular by encouraging tolerance and dialogue.
The Council affirms that the same rights that are available to offline users must also be protected online, in particular freedom of expression, which is applicable regardless of frontiers and whatever media is chosen, in accordance with Articles 19 the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. It calls on all States to address Internet security concerns in accordance with their international human rights obligations in order to ensure the protection of freedom of expression, freedom of association and the right to privacy and other human rights online,
Comments
Post a Comment