Fears that draconian measures to check your internet use, laptop, smart phone or other equipment may work themselves into a new international Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) lay behind recent attempts by MEPs to be consulted in any deal.
Fears that draconian measures to check your internet use, laptop, smart phone or other equipment may work themselves into a new international Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) lay behind recent attempts by MEPs to be consulted in any deal. In a resolution adopted on 10 March MEPs supported measures to protect intellectual property rights, but want the right of freedom of expression and privacy to be upheld in any ACTA agreement.
Stopping the "legislation laundering"
In the resolution MEPs deplored the lack of transparency in the ongoing ACTA negotiations which they feel are conducted by bypassing parliamentary and public oversight. The Parliament is not yet "immediately and fully informed at all stages of the negotiations" even though the Commission has had a legal obligation to do so since Lisbon treaty came into force on 1 December 2009.
This lack of consultation with elected MEPs has provoked a strong response from Stavros Lambrinidis, Parliament's Vice-President and 2009 rapporteur on security and fundamental freedoms.
The Greek Socialist MEP told us that "legislation-laundering, through the vehicle of a secretive international agreement of things that the European Parliament and most national legislatures would not accept, is not the way to conduct European legislation".
No to "three strikes", warrantless searches and confiscation
There are fears the proposed ACTA text could contradict EU anti-counterfeiting and anti-piracy laws, including the "Telecoms Package" requirement of appropriate, proportionate and necessary measures.
MEPs demand that no warrantless searches and confiscation of information storage is conducted at EU borders. Stavros Lambrinidis told us of his fears: "There is a major concern that the negotiations are heading towards introducing provisions similar to the 'three-strikes' law in France, that could see whole households being punished by cutting off internet access to all their members, even if only one person has illegally downloaded a few songs for non-commercial purposes. This Parliament has voted three times against similar disproportionate sanctions in the past."
He went on to say that "with the three-strikes laws, we are giving private companies sweeping rights to monitor indiscriminately every citizen's activities on the internet in order to catch relatively few violators among the millions of innocent users, something that we refuse to allow even to our police when fighting terrorism".
Cross party support
In the European Parliament there would seem to be cross party support for measures to increase the transparency of this agreement.
On 8 March a Parliamentary "Written Declaration" was launched by Socialist MEP Françoise Castex, Zuzana Roithová (European People's Party), Alexander Alvaro (Liberal ALDE group) and Stavros Lambrinidis himself.
During the plenary debate of March 9 Trade Commissioner Karel De Gucht said “the EU will not accept ACTA creating an obligation to disconnect people from the internet because of illegal downloads”.
He went on to say that "ACTA’s objective is to address large-scale infringements of intellectual property rights which have a significant commercial impact. It will not lead to the limitation of civil liberties or harassment of consumers”.
Under provisions of the Lisbon treaty EP has power to veto the whole agreement.