STOCKHOLM,
SWEDEN —
Swedes may
cherish
openness and
transparency,
but not
enough to
accept a new
law giving
the
government
the right to
snoop on all
e-mails and
phone calls
crossing the
country’s
borders.
Outrage over
the statute
has led to 2
million
protests —
filed by
e-mail.
The online
petition
drive comes
as other
European
Union
countries
consider
granting
authorities
unprecedented
spying
powers over
their own
citizens
amid fears
of a
mounting
terror
threat.
‘‘This would
have been
totally
unthinkable
before Sept.
11,’’ said
Anne Ramberg,
secretary-general
of the
Swedish Bar
Association,
calling for
challenges
to the law
in Swedish
and European
courts.
Andreas
Hellsten, a
37-year-old
engineer,
said the new
law reminded
him of
something
the dreaded
East German
police would
have dreamed
up had
e-mail been
around
during the
Cold War.
‘‘It looks
too much
like the
Stasi,’’ he
said. ‘‘It
is
surprising
when Sweden
passes a law
like this.’’
While
supporters
say the
legislation
will help
avert
terrorist
attacks by
keeping tabs
on suspect
communications
and
financial
transfers,
opponents
say the
measures are
just too
intrusive.
Swedish
telecommunications
group
TeliaSonera
AB and
U.S.-based
Google Inc.
have called
the law
passed June
18 the most
far-reaching
eavesdropping
plan in
Europe,
comparable
to snooping
powers
authorized
in the
United
States.
The law
narrowly
passed
Parliament
in a 142-138
vote two
weeks ago,
despite
protests
that
included
demonstrators
handing out
copies of
George
Orwell’s
novel
‘‘1984’’
about a
fictional
futuristic
police
state.
It gives
Sweden’s
National
Defense
Radio
Establishment,
or FRA, the
right to
scan all
international
phone calls,
e-mails and
faxes
without a
court order
as of
January.
‘‘Since
1766, we
have had
freedom of
expression
... Can that
be
guaranteed
if the FRA
has the
right to
monitor, for
example, all
e-mails from
abroad?’’
Thomas
Mattsson,
digital
editor of
the major
Swedish
newspaper
Expressen,
wrote in his
blog.
The
newspaper
provides a
link that
allows
readers of
its Internet
edition to
file a
protest to
lawmakers —
and so far
more than 2
million
Swedes have
taken part
in the
campaign.
Under
current law,
e-mail and
phone
surveillance
in Sweden
require a
court order
in a
suspected
criminal
case.
Critics say
the new law
will
encroach on
privacy,
jeopardize
civil
liberties
and violate
the European
Convention
on Human
Rights.
Sweden’s
Defense
Minister
Sten
Tolgfors
defended the
law in an
online forum
on the
Expressen
Web site
Tuesday,
saying data
regarding
individuals
will be
destroyed
unless it is
directly
relevant to
intelligence
activities.
He also
stressed the
need to
defend
Sweden from
terror
attacks like
those in New
York, Madrid
and London.
‘‘The
information
is needed to
evaluate,
and meet,
outside
threats
against
Sweden,’’ he
said.
Even before
the law was
passed,
TeliaSonera
in April
moved its
e-mail
servers to
Finland
because of
the expected
passage of
the
legislation.
Timo
Lehtinen, of
the Finnish
Communications
Regulatory
Authority,
said he
expected
other
telecommunications
groups to
rethink how
they handle
cross-border
traffic, and
expressed
doubts about
the
effectiveness
of the
Swedish
measures.
‘‘The amount
of traffic
is so vast
that it
would be
like looking
for a needle
in a
haystack,’’
he said.
‘‘If someone
was planning
some kind of
terrorist
activity
they could
make it
extremely
hard, or
even
impossible,
to trace.’’
Other EU
countries
have enacted
or are
mulling
stronger
government
snooping
rules.
Britain has
some of the
most
extensive
surveillance
powers in
the world,
allowing law
enforcement,
intelligence
agencies and
others to
monitor
telephone
calls,
e-mails or
mail, with
special
permission
from the
Home
Secretary.
The evidence
is not
admissible
in court;
Prime
Minister
Gordon Brown
wants to
change that
with new
laws
allowing use
of some
wiretap
evidence.
In Germany,
Parliament
is expected
to pass a
new bill
later this
year giving
officials
the right to
monitor some
criminal
suspects’
e-mails, but
only with a
court order,
as is the
case now for
telephone
wiretaps in
serious
crimes.
In Italy,
which
experts call
one of the
world’s most
wiretapped
democracies,
the debate
is going the
other way —
now focusing
on how to do
more to
protect
privacy.
A Swedish
opinion poll
published
last week
indicated
that 47
percent of
Swedes
opposed the
new law,
while 36
percent are
for it; the
rest were
undecided.
The margin
of error was
not
available.
The protest
could
further
erode
already
declining
support for
Sweden’s
center-right
government,
but is
unlikely to
cause a
government
crisis,
since the
coalition
controls a
solid
parliamentary
majority.
Niklas
Wykman,
chairman of
the
Conservative
Party youth
wing, told
the
Associated
Press that
he can’t
support his
party on the
law.
‘‘We are
against the
general
eavesdropping
of all
Swedish
citizens,
which paves
the way for
a
surveillance
society,’’
he said.
- - - - - -
Blog by
Fred Stopsky,
June 19,
2008
<http://www.suntimes.com/news/blogentries/index.html?bbPostId=Cz8ws9rvAfsIQBE4nlsC480GpCz8INnJOgF2CKCzCUsbmLerR0a&bbParent
WidgetId=B8k88rWwXopuz5STgLeVwBLu>
The easiest
way to get a
bill passed
dealing with
the rights
of people is
to shout the
ever popular
“it’s a
security
issue.” The
Swedish
government
has been
under
pressure
from the
military for
increased
power to
examine
phone and
email
communications
from Swedish
citizens
that are
being sent
across
borders. The
Swedish
parliament
responded by
passing a
new
surveillance
law by a
vote of 143
to 138 which
empowers the
National
Defense
Radio
Establishment(FRA),
which is a
private
organization
despite its
name, to
monitor
emails and
phone
communications
which go
across the
national
border. The
FRA, unlike
the police,
do not need
a court
order in
order to
initiate
surveillance
of people.
The FRA
insists it
will only
examine
emails which
go across
the Swedish
border, but
they will
have to
first read
all emails
in order to
determine
which are
crossing the
border. This
is simply
another step
in fear and
confusion
stemming
from 9/11.
The enemy is
not all
knowing, but
terrorists
certainly
know enough
these days
not to
disclose
important
data in an
email going
across a
border.