Archive | Sweden

The Assange dilemma

I stand with Julian Assange. But I think his case took a turn for the worse this week.

First, to recapitulate: Julian Assange has not been charged with any crime in Sweden. This ridiculous situation is the result of a Swedish prosecutor refusing to interview him about alleged sexual misconduct, in a case that is very thin. Assange has reasons to fear that Sweden might surrender him to the US, where a Grand Jury is preparing his case. Sweden has handed over people to the CIA without prior judicial process on an earlier occasion. And the Wikileaks whistleblower Chelsea Manning has been sentenced to 35 years in prison.

The situation for Julian Assange looks very much like that of a political dissident kept under house arrest.

Article 9 in The UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights reads “No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.”

This declaration has been signed by Sweden as well as the United Kingdom. Now a UN panel under the Human Rights Commissioner has ruled that the way Assange is treated is in breach of this central principle. It is the same panel that e.g. took on the case of Aung San Suu Kyi. Usually, these rulings are held in high. But this time, the shoe seems to be on the other foot. Clearly the UK and Sweden only honor the UN panel when they are not the culprits.

Never the less, this has been lost on most people. It’s all too complicated and sublime.

The British and Swedish governments, on the other hand, only had to deliver simple one-liners. The UK foreign secretary Philip Hammond brands the UN panel’s ruling “ridiculous”. The Swedish government’s line is that this will not change anything.

Also, some media has deemed the UN approach as nonsensical. Remember, it’s simply not enough to be right — if this cannot be communicated in a way that makes an impact.

In practice, very little has changed. And the case against Assange will stay open until August 2020.

Somehow, I have a feeling that the UK, Sweden and the US feel rather content having Julian Assange in limbo at the Ecuadorean embassy in London. There his actions will be limited. And with an open investigation on alleged sex crimes, his reputation will stay tarnished. All of this having a negative impact on Wikileaks possibilities to expose wrongdoings and the dirty little secrets of the power elites.

That is exactly why the UN panel’s report is relevant.

/ HAX

Affidavit of Julian Paul Assange »

 

1

Sweden to censor the Internet?

Is Sweden to join the likes of Turkey, China and Cuba?

It turns out that the Swedish government is looking into the possibility to censor non-licensed online gambling sites.

The pretext is the health and safety of the Swedish people. But the real reason is rather glaring: Money.

The state-owned national gambling company, Svenska Spel, sends a lot of money to the treasure. But that’s just the beginning. Let’s follow the money.

The Social Democrats, who are in government at present, are also the owners of one of the few licensed Swedish gambling companies, A-lotterierna. From this, the party pockets some five million euros a year.

Furthermore, the Swedish foreign minister — Margot Wallström — was recruited from a senior policy position at another licensed gambling company, Postkodlotteriet. This company has been sending millions of euros to the Clinton Foundation. Just between friends.

So, of course, the Swedish government doesn’t want the Swedish people to go to other, foreign gambling sites. The money should stay in the country, preferably in Party hands.

This is preposterous.

So the idea, now being aired, is to block access to all non-licensed gambling sites. (And there are quite a few in the world.)

Opening the doors for Internet censorship — what could possibly go wrong?

I can imagine the ruling political class could fancy blocking quite a few sites that annoys it, if that option becomes available.

Swedish Internet censorship is still under consideration. Now, the civil rights movement will have to sound the alarm and try to stop the idea before it reaches Parliament.

The Swedish government also has a plan B: To block payments to non-licensed gambling companies.

That also is a terrible idea, but in a different way.

/ HAX

2

The normalisation of mass surveillance

Once upon a time, there were rumors about a global surveillance network — Echelon. When the European Parliament decided to look into the matter, it turned out it did indeed exist. For years to follow there were rumors about US intelligence organisation NSA and its new capabilities to “collect it all”. And a few years ago, the Snowden documents exposed exactly that.

Then followed a state of resignation.

In 2013/14, it was brought to light that the NSA might have compromised the international clearing system for bank transfers, European run SWIFT. It’s a bit odd, as the US can have as much information about European bank transfers as they want, in accordance with the EU-US TFTP agreement. Newer the less, there were strong indications of something going on. This time the European police agency, Europol, didn’t even bother to look into the matter. In a European Parliament hearing Europol director Bob Wainwright explicitly said so. (The hearing is quite surreal. It’s all on video here. »)

In Germany, politicians softened their tone against the US/NSA when threatened with limited access to US intelligence. It also turned out that under the level of political polemic, the BND had been working very closely with the NSA all the time. And in Sweden, according to the Snowden files, SIGINT organisation FRA has access to NSA superdatabase XKeyscore. Swedish politicians (including the Greens, who are now in government) will not even comment on the legality of this.

The European Court of Justice has invalidated the EU data retention directive, finding it in breach of fundamental human rights. Never the less most EU member states are upholding (and in some cases implementing) data retention, leading national constitutional courts to object. But data retention fits well with US surveillance systems, so it seems to be less important if it is legal or not.

I could go on, but I better get to my point.

Politicians and intelligence bureaucrats are sending some pretty clear signals these days. They do not care about what is legal or not legal. They do not care if being exposed. They do not even comment on issues that ought to be fundamental in a democracy. The message is: This is the way it is. Live with it.

If there was ever need for a broad political movement against mass surveillance, it is now.

/ HAX

1

Big Brother and Your Money

Many governments are getting very nervous. They struggle with debt, over spending, currency emergencies and new strains on the economy like the European refugee crisis.

So they are keen to make sure that all tax revenues that can be collected will be collected. And mass surveillance gives them a tool to do so.

Also, the move towards a cash free society makes it easier for politicians and bureaucrats to keep track of you and your money.

For years, we have sent bulk data about European bank transfers to the US security bureaucracy under the pretext of fighting terrorism and organized crime (TFTP). In the EU, plans are to replace this system with a European one — aimed to register, control and analyze all of our bank transfers.

In some high-tax countries with submissive population, like Sweden, information from data retention of telecommunications is already being used for taxation purposes.

And this is not just about taxes. If your government controls all your monetary assets, it owns you. Which might come in handy if, someday, people in power would like to curb opposition, limit your civil liberties — or just make your life very difficult.

With no private economic sphere, people are totally in the hands of their whimsical governments and its functionaries.

When it comes to “regular” surveillance concerns, having access to information about your transactions will provide the authorities with a cornucopia of information about you. More so than just surveillance of your electronic and telecommunications.

The government will always be able to give some reasons for its actions. Sometimes even seemingly rational ones. Like striking down on tax evasion. But even these reasons must be weighed against your right to privacy. Just passively accepting them could be used for introducing live surveillance of everybody 24/7.

It’s your life. And it’s your money. Period. The government should just get out of everybody’s hair.

If people could get themselves together and bring about a broader use of Bitcoins, we can bypass all of this governmental economic Big Brotherism.

/ HAX

1

Framing Julian Assange

Wikileaks editor in chief Julian Assange is still a refugee at the Ecuadorean embassy in London.

Assange is suspected of sexual misconduct in Sweden. He has yet not been charged with anything. His case has already been dismissed by one Swedish prosecutor — but reopened by another, issuing an European Arrest Warrant to have him interrogated in Sweden. British courts allowed extradition to Sweden, despite Assange fearing that the Swedes might hand him over to the US. (Where a grand jury apparently is preparing a case against him.) Then, Assange jumped bail and was granted political asylum at the Ecuadorean embassy.

I will leave the substance of the Swedish case aside in this blog post. But I can tell you, it’s very thin.

Now the statutory time period for charging Assange with the lesser of the alleged crimes in Sweden is running out. (Other parts of the investigation will remain open for another five years.)

For years Swedish prosecutor Marianne Ny has refused to conduct an interview with Assange i London. (Even before his escape to the Ecuadorean embassy.) She claimed that it cannot be done, that Swedish prosecutors cannot do that. That was a plain lie. (Hell, even I have been interviewed by a Swedish prosecutor abroad.) Swedish courts and even the British government have urged Ms Ny to have this done and over with.

Finally, Friday June 12:th this summer, Swedish authorities sent a letter to the Ecuadorean embassy in Sweden — asking for an interview with Assange in London only five days later (including the weekend). To no surprise the embassy in Stockholm, the Ecuadorean government and their embassy in London did not manage to coordinate this in just a few days. So there was no interview.

Now the investigation of the suspected crimes of a lesser degree will be closed. Julian Assange will still be suspected of wrongdoing, in the public view. But not able to clear his name (in these parts) anymore. At the same time the investigations of the remaining suspected crimes will stay open, the European Arrest Warrant will still be in force and Assange will still be stuck at the embassy in London.

A perfect way for various governments to keep an inconvenient journalist in limbo, if you ask me.

/ HAX

2

A first sign of an EU ban on encryption?

I noticed that UK Prime Minister Camerons idea that governments should be able to circumvent encryption (the “backdoor” concept) has been echoed by the leader of the Swedish parliamentary opposition, the centre-right partys (Moderaterna) Anna Kinberg Batra.

At a glance this seems to be rather insignificant. But you should know that under the former Swedish centre-right government Sweden established itself as a very close partner to US NSA and British GCHQ. The Snowden files reveals that Sweden (code name: Sardine) is in so close cooperation with the US lead “five eyes coalition” that you could actually talk of a “six eyes coalition”. When the Swedish electronic surveillance organisation Försvarets Radioanstalt (FRA) was given extended mandate it is said that the US helped the Swedish government to draft the new law. And many of the shady details of the FRA law seems to be copied from the US legislative framework.

The Swedish opposition leader wouldn’t do anything concerning mass surveillance without consulting with the US and the UK. (And the present Swedish red-green government is just as compliant.)

This is what is significant. When Swedish politicians echo what is being said in Washington and London – you can be almost certain that there is some coordinated political action going on. And when it comes to Big Brotherism, Sweden is a really bad influence on other EU member states.

This might very well be the first sign that a ban on encryption is to be coordinated at a European level. (It is open to question if this is within EU competence. But if not, the member states probably will do as usual: Coordinate national legislation after an informal conclusion in the Council.)

/ HAX

1

Pirate Bay domains seized by Swedish court

Today a Swedish district court decided that Pirate Bay founder Fredrik Neij no longer can control the domains piratebay.se and thepiratebay.se – as they have been used for “illegal activities”.

However – the court does not give the government control over the domains. They stay with the domain top level administrator, the Punkt.se foundation.

On the one hand, it is strange that domain names can be seized. It is like if a street adress would be seized, because of illegal activities carried out there.

On the other hand, it is interesting that the court does not accept the prosecutors demand for the domain names to be handed over to the Swedish government. This still gives top domain administrators some leverage – and indicates that they are not liable for how a domain is used.

But the most important lesson to be learned from todays verdict is that we need to build a decentralised system for domain names — where they cannot be seized or taken down.

/ HAX

Read more: Key Pirate Bay Domains Must Be Seized, Court Rules »

8

Friend or foe in the surveillance state?

In Norway and Sweden, false mobile telephone base stations of unknown origin have been discovered in government quarters. In both cases the media, not the authorities, has been behind the discovery.

The question is who? And why?

The prime suspect is Russia. Lately, the country has been military active in the Scandinavian neighbourhood. And what good are military provocations, if you cannot get feedback about the reactions?

Another possibility is the US and the NSA. If they can listen in on German politicians–why not Norwegian and Swedish ones?

Then there is a chilling possibility that national intelligence organisations are spying on their own governments. (The Swedish police has got the equipment to set up false base stations. Probably the Norwegian has, as well.)

These days it’s not a given who is friend or foe.

/ HAX

1

A never ending struggle

For some days I have been a complete political news junkie–as the latest Swedish government just went down in flames. Looking forward, naturally I have some general preferences about who should rule my country. (Even if a lame duck administration as the present one isn’t all that bad. Hopefully it will not be able to do a lot of stupid stuff.)

But when it comes to some of my favourite issues, I’m frustrated.

We have the centre-right parties (in power until September 2014)–being really bad on surveillance, ignorant at best when it comes to data protection and in the grip of the copyright industry.

Then we have the socdem-greens (that, in practice, fell from power yesterday). The Social Democrats are just as bad as the centre-right people in these matters. And the Greens are selling out on the same issues, just for the grandeur of being in government. (Come on, give the Ring back to the nice Mr. Frodo.)

The third group (causing most of the stir) are some nationalist, xenophobic and semi-populists. Again, they are just as bad. (I guess that they haven’t realised that they are a given target for government surveillance.) And in general they are occupied with nostalgia rather than issues concerning the future.

Finally we have the Pirate Party, not even in the Swedish parliament with only 0.43 per cent of the votes in the latest elections. (So I guess the general population doesn’t bother about these issues either…)

Still, the surveillance issues are important–and rather pressing. What the government does in the EU is important as we are in the process of hammering-out new European data protection rules. And an European copyright reform.

In the bigger picture a free and open Internet is essential for democracy, culture, business, science and education. Yet, in Sweden 99,57 per cent of the votes are casted on political parties more or less uninterested, ignorant or plain evil when it comes to Internet and surveillance matters.

And it seems that Sweden isn’t unique. The picture is the same in most countries.

In dark moments I think this might be just as well. There are no guarantees that politicians will do the right thing, even if they are interested. So it might be better to trust spontaneous order, peoples creativity, the market and net freedom activists to be one step ahead and to raise objections if politicians go wrong.

The problem is, politicians go wrong about the Internet, surveillance, data protection, copyright and civil liberties all the time. The fact that they are uninterested or ignorant doesn’t stop them. In most cases they just rubber stamp papers that government officials hand them, anyway. Politics is in the equation, like it or not.

So we need to apply a constant external pressure on politics. To show the way, to campaign and to hit politicians and government officials hard when they do something stupid or dangerous.

It’s a never ending struggle.

/ HAX

0