Iran steps up for regulation of our on-line world

TEHERAN – There have been talks in parliament over the past few months about regulating Internet use. This report examines the crux of the problem. Should Governments Regulate Internet Use and Why?

According to the Oxford Dictionary, the Internet is “a global computer network that provides various information and communication facilities, consisting of interconnected networks that use standardized communication protocols”. Building on this definition, it can be useful and harmful at the same time.

As shown below, several countries have had to change their laws to make the Internet better suited to their interests.

France

France has tried to regulate the internet using a mechanism that was put in place to monitor Minitel. It has proposed hiring inspectors from its famous Minitel to search the Minitel system and review content to ensure that the information providers are complying with the terms of their contract with France Télécom. If the approach is implemented, France will of course join the communist bloc countries to manually check Internet content.

At the moment, however, the legal situation is uncertain as the section of the French law that created the police mechanism has been declared unconstitutional by the French Conseil Constitutionnel (Constitutional Council) due to lack of clarity.

France’s widespread Minitel system is regulated by the CST (le Conseil Supérieur de la Télématique). This body ensures that each content provider complies with the contract signed with France Télécom. The monitoring function is reportedly carried out by five to eight people who work at France Télécom.

In early 1996 the French government set up a commission to investigate the regulation of the network. In essence, it recommended self-filtering as opposed to filtering at the source. Where necessary, she urged international cooperation in monitoring the network. It also recommended rules to improve the French presence and language on the web.

However, the recommendations were overshadowed by a proposal named after Telecommunications Minister François Fillon to regulate the Internet. In a style perhaps characteristic of France, regulation is carried out by a “negative option” – IAPs do not have to adhere to the CST’s code of conduct. Nevertheless, those who adhere to the code are exempted from legal liability for transmitted texts, images and documents. Since legal obligations are uncertain, the implications of such a law are uncertain.

Internet organizations and professionals should become members of the new CST. In its “Minitel” form, the CST has 20 members made up of judges, ministerial officials, representatives of France Télécom, Minitel providers, family and consumer organizations. IAPs that do not respond to Internet site or newsgroup block lists will be held responsible for their implementation. It is this law that empowered the CST to censor that has been declared unconstitutional.

Following the enactment of the law and the arrest of two managers from French IAPs, the French Association of Internet Professionals (AFPI), an ISP advocacy group, decided to remove 18 obscene, pedophile and neo-Nazi newsgroups from their servers. The AFPI, which has four members but claims to represent “more than 50 percent” of the French market, feared that IAPs could be held responsible for the content they submit. A representative of the AFPI said that this ban could not be called censorship because “every subscriber is free to choose another Usenet server”.

France proposed to develop a code of conduct for the Internet. However, users were not invited to participate.

South Korea

Probably the first country to have an internet-specific censorship law is South Korea. In 1995, South Korea passed the Electronic Communication Business Law, which established the Information & Communication Ethics Office. The Office has extensive powers of censorship: its scope includes material on bulletin board services (BBS), chat rooms and other “public services” that “violate public morals”, “cause a loss of national sovereignty,” and ” Information that can affect the character, emotions and esteem of young people ”.

According to the law, the Minister of Communications can instruct an information provider to delete and restrict the material. One of the three service providers for online and Internet content counted more than 220,000 deleted messages in the first eight months of 1996.

South Korea is characterized by its unique regulation of political speech: contacts and even expressions of sympathy towards North Korea are prohibited. The Prosecutor’s Office in South Korea has stated that strict measures will be taken against anyone who tries to access North Korean websites on the World Wide Web.

Germany

Germany recently drafted a “multimedia” law that censors pornography and anti-Semitic propaganda, among other things. Actions that are already banned in Germany – such as denying the Holocaust, distributing hardcore pornography to minors and conducting fraudulent transactions – will also be illegal in electronic form.

German law places responsibility for suspicious content on “suppliers”, but this is not clearly defined. One interpretation of the new provision is that online services such as CompuServe and America Online could be held liable for legally questionable material after being advised that such material could be accessed through their systems if they do not have the technical means to block the material.

The European Union

The European Commission has recommended a voluntary code of conduct for the Internet and proposes to use labeling and filtering based on the PICS principle (Platform for Internet Content Selection). However, there are at least two problems. First, the labeling and filtering systems are not compatible. Second, the European Union needs to develop a framework to clarify the administrative rules and regulations that apply to access and content providers.

As discussed above, many countries in the world have felt the need to regulate Internet use since it spread around the world. Iran is no exception to this natural rule.

MPs have proposed a bill to regulate Internet use in Iran. Work on this bill has been in progress for over 15 months.
Like all countries, Iran does not try to block the internet as it is impossible. The proposed bill only discusses promoting localization of the Internet by giving domestic platforms equal opportunities to compete with international ones.

In a tweet published on Friday, Parliament spokesman Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf specifically said that widespread platforms such as Instagram and WhatsApp would not be blocked.

The proposed law does not suggest blocking any social media platforms.

In recent years, popular social media platforms such as Instagram and Twitter have acted as tools for the US government despite being an international platform. A case in point is the widespread censorship of the Iranian martyr, the late General Qassem Soleimani. Instagram has been deleting Soleimani images and hashtags since his cowardly murder in January 2020. Posting a picture of him regardless of his political position could result in an account being deleted. Owned by Facebook, Instagram followed his father’s policies. Facebook permanently deleted the Tehran Times account after a picture of the martyr Soleimani was used along with his hashtag. This double standard comes amid claims made by free speech advocates in the West about “free access to data”.

Iran sees another need to regulate the internet. Examples of the abuse of protests by terrorist groups such as the Mujahedin-E-Khalgh Organization (MEK) during the November 2019 protests show that Iran needs to regulate Internet use to prevent the spread of misinformation. The MEK and other enemies have tried hard in cyberspace to disrupt the lives of the Iranian people. During the recent protests in Khuzestan province over water shortages, MEK members spread misinformation and bold lies about the crux of the problem and linked the protests to discontent with the establishment, which was wrong. This propaganda has not and will not end here. With every single demonstration they try to spread controversy in Iran.

Another reason for Iran to regulate internet use is that a lot of personal data is in the hands of social media platforms like Instagram, which, ironically, don’t even respect their users. Iran’s chief judge, Gholam Hossein Mohseni Ejei, opened an Instagram account on Wednesday. On Thursday night, Instagram closed his account for “unknown reasons”. The platform didn’t even think its users were worth explaining. There is a possibility of spying on Iranian users with the amount of data available.

The bottom line is that regulating the internet is nothing strange and unknown. Still, the mainstream media seems to be portraying Iran is going to block the internet completely. Needless to say, this is an unsubstantiated claim.

SA / PA

Comments are closed.