Activities of Inger SEGELSTRÖM related to 2008/2160(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Strengthening security and fundamental freedoms on the Internet (debate)
Amendments (11)
Amendment 3 #
Proposal for a recommendation
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the evolution of the Internet proves that it is becoming an indispensable tool for promoting democratic initiatives, a new arena for the political debate (e.g., e- campaigning, e-voting), a key instrument at world level for exercising freedom of expression (e.g., blogging) and for developing business activities,; whereas the Internet has also brought with it an increasing number of opportunities for people of all ages to communicate with people from different parts of the world, for example, and has thereby expanded the scope for people to familiarise themselves with other cultures and thus enhance their understanding of other people and cultures; whereas the Internet has also extended the diversity of news sources for individuals as they are now able to tap into the flow of news from different parts of the world,
Amendment 9 #
Proposal for a recommendation
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas, through the freedom that it providesdespite the fact that the Internet should, to the greatest possible extent, be free for all to use and that there should be great respect for personal integrity, the Internet has also been used as a platform for violent and undemocratic messages such as the ones inciting to terrorist attacks, and whereas cybercrime threats more broadly have increased worldwide and are endangering individuals (including children) and networks,
Amendment 11 #
Proposal for a recommendation
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas these crimes must be counteredInternet crime calls for effectively and decisively, without altering measures, which must not, however pose a threat to the fundamental free and open nature of the Internet; whereas the Commission should, therefore, be instructed to investigate the possibility of coordinating these measures within the EU with a view to ensuring that such a threat does not materialise,
Amendment 13 #
Proposal for a recommendation
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas, in a democratic society, it is should be typified by the principle of transparency where the citizens who are entitled to observe and to judge daily the actions and beliefs of their governments and of private companies that provide them with services, and not the government democratically elected representatives, public authorities and institutions and companies that provide them with services, not vice-versa; whereas use of the Internet should not be exempt from this principle; whereas democratically elected representatives or companies wsho are entitleduld not be allowed to assume the right to observe daily and to judge daily the actions and beliefs of their citizeninformation, activities and beliefs; whereas technologically advanced surveillance techniques, combined with lax laws prescribing the limits of their application, increasingly threaten this principle, since legal protection is lacking,
Amendment 15 #
Proposal for a recommendation
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas technological leaps increasingly allow for the secret andsurveillance, virtually undetected surveillanceable to the individual, of citizens’ activities on the Internet; whereas the mere existence of surveillance technologies shouldall not automatically justify their uses, but whereas the overriding interest of protecting citizens’ fundamental rights should determine the limits and precise circumstances under which such technologies may be used by public authorities or private companies, companies; whereas combating Internet crime and the threats to an open democratic society which certain persons and organisations constitute when they use the Internet to damage citizens' rights, must not mean that Member States assume the right to intercept and monitor all data traffic on the Internet which occurs on their territory, whether that applies to their own citizens or data traffic from abroad; whereas the combating of crime must be proportionate to the nature of the crime; whereas the European Ombudsman should be instructed, together with national representatives or ombudsmen, to develop a method of securing fundamental civil freedoms and rights in the fight against Internet crime.
Amendment 30 #
Proposal for a recommendation
Recital L a (new)
Recital L a (new)
La. whereas Internet search engines and service providers have made it considerably easier for people to obtain information about other individuals, for example; whereas, however, there are situations in which individuals wish to delete information held in such databases; whereas, therefore, companies must be able to ensure that individuals can have person-related data deleted from databases; whereas a system should also be set up so that companies providing these services can only sell the information on to other companies after obtaining consent;
Amendment 42 #
Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 point (g)
Paragraph 1 point (g)
(g) encourage programmes to protect children and educate their parents as set out in EU law with respect to the new e- dangers and provide an impact assessment of the effectiveness of existing programmes to date. In doing so, particular account should be taken of the online games which primarily target children and young people; video, TV and computer games should be included in the 'Safer Internet' programme;
Amendment 51 #
Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 - point (i)
Paragraph 1 - point (i)
(i) ensure that the expressions of controversial political beliefs or views through the Internet, including with regard to terrorism, isprovided they fall within the framework of EU law and national law, are not subject to criminal prosecution;
Amendment 55 #
Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 - point (ja) (new)
Paragraph 1 - point (ja) (new)
(ja) ensure that Member States which intercept and monitor data traffic, regardless of whether that applies to their own citizens or data traffic from abroad, which occurs within their territory, amend their laws and respect the principle that it should only be possible to use data traffic interception where there is a court ruling concerning reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, manifest danger to the safety of persons or genuine threats to open democratic society;
Amendment 61 #
Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 - point (m)
Paragraph 1 - point (m)
(m) strictly limit and define the cases in which a private Internet company may be required to disclose data to government authorities and investigate how control and evaluation can operate and be developed;
Amendment 63 #
Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 - point (n)
Paragraph 1 - point (n)
(n) condemn government-imposed censorship of the content that may be searched on Internet sites, especially when such restrictions can have a 'chilling effect' on political speech;nitiated blocking and censorship of Internet content, especially when such restrictions can have a 'chilling effect' on the democratic exchange of information, with the exception of the fight against serious crime on the Internet; .