Riseup, a tech collective that provides security-minded communications to activists
worldwide, sounded the alarm last month when a judge in Spain stated that the use of their
email service is a practice, he believes, associated with terrorism. ---- Javier G?mez
Berm?dez is a judge of Audiencia Nacional, a special high court in Spain that deals with
serious crimes such as terrorism and genocide. According to press reports, he ordered
arrest warrants that were carried out on December 16th against alleged members of an
anarchist group. The arrests were part of Operation Pandora, a coordinated campaign
against ?anarchist activity? that has been called an attempt ?to criminalize anarchist
social movements.? The police seized books, cell phones, and computers, and arrested 11
activists. Few details are known about the situation, since the judge has declared the
case secret.
At least one lawmaker, David Companyon, has speculated that the raids are a ?stunt to
garner support for Spain?s recently approved ?gag law.?? The new law severely restricts
demonstrations, setting huge fines for activities such as insulting police officers
(?600), burning a national flag (up to ?30,000), or demonstrating outside parliament
buildings or key installations (up to ?600,000). Considering the provisions of the law,
it?s no surprise that many see the raid, conducted against a group with political ideas
that the government appears to find threatening, as connected.
In a statement, Riseup noted:
Four of the detainees have been released, but seven have been jailed pending trial. The
reasons given by the judge for their continued detention include the possession of certain
books, "the production of publications and forms of communication?, and the fact that the
defendants ?used emails with extreme security measures, such as the RISE UP server.
It?s unclear exactly what the judge means by ?extreme security measures.? As Riseup points
out, ?many of the ?extreme security measures? used by Riseup are common best practices for
online security.? It seems the inherent assumption behind the judge?s decision is that
using services that follow best practices for online security should be considered
suspicious. This clearly runs contrary to the presumption of innocence, a core requirement
of international human rights law. But what?s more, using services with strong security is
how individuals can exercise their right to privacy and expression in the digital age
while staying safe. Every new data breach and security disaster reminds us of this.
Calling the desire to be safe online ?extreme? is incredibly disturbing. But it?s hardly
surprising. During the ?Crypto wars? of the 1990s, the US government propagated the idea
that strong encryption should be treated like a weapon. That may be because strong
security makes it harder for agencies like the NSA to brazenly surveil everyone?and makes
it harder to repress groups with political ideas that threaten the status quo. There?s no
question that anarchists fall into that category, and it?s perhaps that issue that has the
Spanish government concerned.
In its statement, Riseup explains that it ?has an obligation to protect the privacy of its
users,? and ?is not willing to allow illegal backdoors or sell our users? data to third
parties.?
There?s strong evidence that the NSA has ensured that backdoors are built into many
products and services. Companies and groups such as Riseup want to provide users with
reliable, secure network services even when?in fact especially when?dealing with requests
from law enforcement and lawyers to hand over private user information and logs. They have
developed strong policies to protect themselves from legal liability, but more importantly
to protect the safety and privacy of their users.
The need for that privacy and security cannot be overstated. In his landmark report to the
23rd session of the Human Rights Council, the U.N.'s free speech watchdog, Frank La Rue
made clear that secure communication are critical for an open society. La Rue stated:
Individuals should be free to use whatever technology they choose to secure their
communications, and that states should not interfere with the use of encryption technologies.
Without adequate protection to privacy, security and anonymity of communications, no one
can be sure that his or her private communications are not under states? scrutiny.
Privacy is an essential feature of any free society. Alongside the ?gag law,? repressing
private, secure communications sends a distressing signal about the Spanish government?s
intentions. But there is still time for the court to correct this decision. If the reason
these activists are being held truly is their perfectly reasonable and common decision to
secure their own communications, they should be released now.
Home »
» Alt. Media, Security is Not a Crime - Unless You're an Anarchist