Talk at the "Das ist Netzpolitik" conference in 2016, Berlin, Germany.

1. We draw avery important
conclusion here with a
merely dark image behind it,
so the text is white...Anti-terrorism measures
Censoring the web, making us less secure
@kirst3nf

2. We draw avery important
conclusion here with a
merely dark image behind it,
so the text is white...
Populism
Opportunism
Ideology
What now?

3. Populism
the driver since 9/11

4. I. Measures since 9/11
Year EU anti-terrorism measures
2001 EU terrorist “blacklists”
2001 Common Position on combating terrorism
2002 Council Framework Decision on Terrorism
2003 Regulation on the implementation of the common basic standards on aviation
security
2004 EU Council declaration on combatting terrorism containing 57 specific measures,
among them:
2004 Directive on the obligation of carrier to communicate passenger data [API Directive]
2004 Regulation on standards for security features and biometrics in passports and travel
documents issued by Member States
2005 Prüm Convention (MS exchange data on DNA, fingerprints and vehicle registration of
concerned persons and to cooperate against terrorism)
2005 Third anti-money laundering Directive
2006 Regulation on the establishment, operation and use of the second generation
Schengen Information System (SIS II)
2006 Data Retention Directive [repealed]
2010 EU/USA Agreement: processing and transfer of Financial Messaging Data [SWIFT] for
purposes of the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program [TFTP]
2012 EU/USA Agreement: use and transfer of passenger name records (PNR) to the United
States DHS

5. Opportunism
2015/2016 attacks

6. “Never waste a good crisis!”
- Jan Jambon, Belgian Interior Minister
quoting Winston Churchill, 28 September 2016

7. EU
2015 - 2016 EU Internet Forum
2016 Directive on the use of Passenger Name Records (EU PNR)
2016 Europol Regulation
2016 Launch of European Counter Terrorism Centre (ECTC)
2016 Creation of a new portfolio on security: Commissioner Sir Julian
King
201? Anti-Terrorism Directive

8. Ideology
the Anti-Terrorism Directive

9. Public
debate/event
Policy Timeline

10. Political
debates
Policy
options
Public
debate/event
Policy Timeline

11. Commission
Political
debates
Policy
options
Public
debate/event
Policy Timeline

12. Commission
Political
debates
Policy
options
Public
debate/event
Proposal
and
impact ass.
Policy Timeline

13. Policy
options
Proposal
and
Impact Ass.
Policy Timeline
Council
Parliament
Commission
Political
debates
Public
debate/event

14. Policy
options
Proposal
and
Impact Ass.
Policy Timeline
Member
States
Council
Parliament
Commission
Decision
Political
debates
Public
debate/event

15. Commission
Political
debates
Public
debate/event
Advocacy
Proposal
and
Impact Ass.
Policy
options
13/11/15 2/12/15
Anti-Terrorism Directive
11/3/16
12/7/16

17. We draw avery important
conclusion here with a
merely dark image behind it,
so the text is white...
Ideology: no evidence needed

18. Member
States
Council
Parliament
Commission
Political
debates
Public
debate/event
Advocacy
Proposal
and
Impact Ass.
Decision
Policy
options
13/11/15 2/12/15
Anti-Terrorism Directive
11/3/16
12/7/16

19. We draw avery important
conclusion here with a
merely dark image behind it,
so the text is white...
Ideology: no political debate needed

21. We draw avery important
conclusion here with a
merely dark image behind it,
so the text is white...Ideology: no nuanced
approach needed

22. Anti-Terrorism Directive
Financing, travel, radicalisation
and cybercyber

23. Anti-Terrorism Directive
1. Vague definitions
2. Blocking & censorship
3. Weakening of encryption,
interception
4. Attacks on information systems

24. 1. Vague definitions
“increasing misuse of the internet for
terrorist purposes”
“indirect provocation”
“radicalisation of citizens”
“glorification and justification of terrorism”

28. We draw avery important
conclusion here with a
merely dark image behind it,
so the text is white...Ideology:
definitions not needed

29. Recital (7b) An effective means of combatting terrorism on the internet is to
remove illegal terrorist content at source. In that context, this Directive is without
prejudice to voluntary action taken by the internet industry to prevent the misuse
of its services or to any support for such action by Member States, such as
detecting and flagging illegal content. Member States should take all necessary
measures to remove or to block access to web pages publicly inciting others to
commit terrorist offences. Where such measures are taken, they should be in line
with transparent procedures and subject to adequate safeguards under the
control of independent authorities. Member States should use their best
endeavours to cooperate with third countries in seeking to secure the removal of
such content from servers within their territory. However, when removal of illegal
content at its source is not possible, Member States should be able to put in
place measures to block access from Union territory to web pages identified as
containing or disseminating terrorist content. Member States should consider
legal action against internet and social media companies and service providers
which deliberately refuse to comply with a legal order to delete illegal content
extolling terrorism from their internet platforms after being duly notified about
such content. Any refusal should be punishable by effective, proportionate and
dissuasive sanctions. The right to judicial review should be guaranteed to the
internet and social media companies and service providers.
In that context, this Directive is without prejudice
to voluntary action taken by the internet industry
to prevent the misuse of its services or to any
support for such action by Member States, such as
detecting and flagging illegal content.
2. Blocking and censorship

30. Recital (7b) An effective means of combatting terrorism on the internet is to
remove illegal terrorist content at source. In that context, this Directive is without
prejudice to voluntary action taken by the internet industry to prevent the misuse
of its services or to any support for such action by Member States, such as
detecting and flagging illegal content. Member States should take all necessary
measures to remove or to block access to web pages publicly inciting others to
commit terrorist offences. Where such measures are taken, they should be in line
with transparent procedures and subject to adequate safeguards under the
control of independent authorities. Member States should use their best
endeavours to cooperate with third countries in seeking to secure the removal of
such content from servers within their territory. However, when removal of illegal
content at its source is not possible, Member States should be able to put in
place measures to block access from Union territory to web pages identified as
containing or disseminating terrorist content. Member States should consider
legal action against internet and social media companies and service providers
which deliberately refuse to comply with a legal order to delete illegal content
extolling terrorism from their internet platforms after being duly notified about
such content. Any refusal should be punishable by effective, proportionate and
dissuasive sanctions. The right to judicial review should be guaranteed to the
internet and social media companies and service providers.
Member States should take all necessary measures to
remove or to block access to web pages publicly inciting
others to commit terrorist offences.
2. Blocking and censorship

31. We draw avery important
conclusion here with a
merely dark image behind it,
so the text is white...
Ideology:
no need for measures
that actually work

32. Recital (15d) The fact that terrorist organisations
rely heavily upon various electronic tools, the
internet and social media to communicate, promote,
and incite terrorist acts, to recruit potential fighters,
to collect funds, or to arrange for other support for
their activities, creates challenges in investigations
and prosecutions of terrorist offences. Member
States should therefore cooperate with each other
notably through Eurojust and Europol and with the
Commission to ensure a coordinated approach in
dealing with the gathering, sharing, and
admissibility of electronic evidence.
3. Encryption & interception

33. Recital (15d) The fact that terrorist organisations
rely heavily upon various electronic tools, the
internet and social media to communicate, promote,
and incite terrorist acts, to recruit potential fighters,
to collect funds, or to arrange for other support for
their activities, creates challenges in investigations
and prosecutions of terrorist offences. Member
States should therefore cooperate with each other
notably through Eurojust and Europol and with the
Commission to ensure a coordinated approach in
dealing with the gathering, sharing, and
admissibility of electronic evidence.
3. Encryption & interception
ensure a coordinated approach in dealing with the
gathering, sharing, and admissibility of electronic
evidence.

34. Recital (15f) A Eurojust report of November
2014 notes that the growing sophistication
and wider use of anonymisers, proxy
servers, the Tor network, satellite links
and foreign 3G networks create additional
challenges to the gathering and analysis of
electronic evidence, which are rendered
even greater by the storage of data in the
cloud.
[not adopted]
3. Encryption & interception

36. IV. What can I do?

37. We draw avery important
conclusion here with a
merely dark image behind it,
so the text is white...
Ideology: real security not needed

38. 3. Encryption & interception
Recital (15a) To ensure the success of investigations
[...], those responsible for investigating and prosecuting
such offences should have the possibility to make use
of effective investigative tools such as those which are
used in combating organised crime or other serious
crimes.
Such tools should [...] include, for example, the search of
any personal property, the interception of
communications, covert surveillance including
electronic surveillance, the taking and the fixing of audio
recordings in private or public vehicles and places, and
of visual images of persons in public vehicles and
places, (…) and financial investigations(…).

39. Recital (15a) To ensure the success of investigations and the
prosecution of terrorist offences, offences related to a
terrorist group or offences related to terrorist activities, those
responsible for investigating and prosecuting such offences
should have the possibility to make use of effective
investigative tools such as those which are used in
combating organised crime or other serious crimes. Such
tools should, where appropriate, while taking into account
the principle of proportionality and the nature and
seriousness of the offences under investigation in
accordance with national law, include, for example, the
search of any personal property, the interception of
communications, covert surveillance including electronic
surveillance, the taking and the fixing of audio recordings in
private or public vehicles and places, and of visual images of
persons in public vehicles and places, (…) and financial
investigations(…).
3. Encryption & interception
include, for example, the search of any personal property,
the interception of communications, covert surveillance
including electronic surveillance, the taking and the
fixing of audio recordings in private or public vehicles
and places, and of visual images of persons in public
vehicles and places,

40. We draw avery important
conclusion here with a
merely dark image behind it,
so the text is white...
Ideology:
privacy not needed

41. 4. Attacks on information systems
Article 3 - Terrorist offences
ha) attacks against information
systems as defined in Articles 3 to 7 of
Directive 2013/40/EU of the European
Parliament and of the Council;
(i)seriously threatening to commit any
of the acts listed in points (a) to (h)

42. We draw avery important
conclusion here with a
merely dark image behind it,
so the text is white...
Ideology:
real security not needed

43. EU Council:
+ surveillance
+ interception
EU Parliament:
+ web blocking
+ attacks against computer systems
CONCLUSION

44. Member
States
Council
Parliament
Commission
Political
debates
Public
debate/event
Advocacy
Policy
options
13/11/15 2/12/15
II. Anti-Terrorism Directive
11/3/16
12/7/16
Proposal
and
Impact Ass.
Decision

45. We draw avery important
conclusion here with a
merely dark image behind it,
so the text is white...
What now?

46. What now?
1. Blog, tweet etc.
2. Contact MEP Hohlmeier
3. Contact S&D (especially Germans)
4. Contact your permanent representation
/ Ministry

47. We draw avery important
conclusion here with a
merely dark image behind it,
so the text is white...
Thanks!
@kirst3nf
kirsten.fiedler@edri.org
@edri
https://edri.org