24 Amendments of Ana GOMES related to 2018/0331(COD)
Amendment 94 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) In order to provide clarity about the actions that both hosting service providers and competent authorities should take to prevent the dissemination of terrorist content online, this Regulation should establish a definition of terrorist content for preventative purposes drawing on the definition of terrorist offences under Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council9 . Given the need to address the most harmful terrorist propaganda online, the definition should capture material and information that incites, encourages or advocates the commission or contribution to terrorist offences, provides instructions for the commission of such offences or promotes the participation in activities of a terrorist group. Such information includes in particular text, images, sound recordings and videos. When assessing whether content constitutes terrorist content within the meaning of this Regulation, competent authorities as well as hosting service providers should take into account factors such as the nature and wording of the statements, the context in which the statements were made and their potential to lead to harmful consequences, thereby affecting the security and safety of persons. The fact that the material was produced by, is attributable to or disseminated on behalf of an EU-listed terrorist organisation or person constitutes an important factor in the assessment. Content disseminated for educational, journalistic or, research purposes should be adequately protected, artistic and editorial purposes should not however be considered as terrorist content, and should therefore be excluded from the scope of this Regulation. Furthermore, the expression of radical, polemic or controversial views in the public debate on sensitive political questions should not be considered terrorist content. _________________ 9Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2017 on combating terrorism and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA and amending Council Decision 2005/671/JHA (OJ L 88, 31.3.2017, p. 6).
Amendment 110 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) In order to cover those online hosting services where terrorist content is disseminated, this Regulation should apply to information society services which store information provided by a recipient of the service at his or her request and in making the information stored available to third parties, irrespective of whether this activity is of a mere technical, automatic and passive nature. By way of example such providers of information society services include social media platforms, video streaming services, video, image and audio sharing services, file sharing and other cloud services to the extent they make the information available to third partiese public and websites where users can make comments or post reviews. The Regulation should also apply to hosting service providers established outside the Union but offering services within the Union, since a significant proportion of hosting service providers exposed to terrorist content on their services are established in third countries. This should ensure that all companies operating in the Digital Single Market comply with the same requirements, irrespective of their country of establishment. The determination as to whether a service provider offers services in the Union requires an assessment whether the service provider enables legal or natural persons in one or more Member States to use its services. However, the mere accessibility of a service provider’s website or of an email address and of other contact details in one or more Member States taken in isolation should not be a sufficient condition for the application of this Regulation.
Amendment 127 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) The procedure and obligations resulting from legal orders requesting hosting service providers to remove terrorist content or disable access to it, following an assessment by the competent authorities, should be harmonised. Member States should remain free as to the choice of the competent authorities allowing them to designate judicial authorities with that task that could be supported by administrative, and law enforcement or judicial authorities with that taskbodies. Given the speed at which terrorist content is disseminated across online services, this provision imposes obligations on hosting service providers to ensure that terrorist content identified in the removal order is removed or access to it is disabled within one hour from receiving the removal order. It is for the hosting service providers to decide whether to remove the content in question or disable access to the content for users in the Union.
Amendment 158 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) In order to ensure that hosting service providers exposed to terrorist content take appropriate measures to prevent the misuse of their services, the competent authorities should request hosting service providers having received a removal order, which has become final, to report on the proactive measures taken. These could consist of measures to prevent the re-upload of terrorist content, removed or access to it disabled as a result of a removal order or referrals they received, checking against publicly or privately-held tools containing known terrorist content. They may also employ the use of reliable technical tools to identify new terrorist content, either using those available on the market or those developed by the hosting service provider. The service provider should report on the specific proactive measures in place in order to allow the competent authority to judge whether the measures are effective and proportionate and whether, if automated means are used, the hosting service provider has the necessary abilities for human oversight and verification. In assessing the effectiveness and proportionality of the measures, competent authorities should take into account relevant parameters including the number of removal orders and referrals issued to the provider, their economic capacity and the impact of its service in disseminating terrorist content (for example, taking into account the number of users in the Union) as well as the level of exposure of the host service provider to terrorist content.
Amendment 168 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) Following the request, the competent authority should enter into a dialogue with the hosting service provider about the necessary proactive measures to be put in place. If necessary, the competent authority should impose the adoption of appropriate, effective and proportionate proactive measures where it considers that the measures taken are insufficient to meet the risks. A decision to impose such specific proactive measures should not, in principle, lead to the imposition of a general obligation to monitor, as provided in Article 15(1) of Directive 2000/31/EC, and has to guarantee that it does not conflicted with existing EU law, in particular the latter E- Commerce Directive and its Article 15(1) . Considering the particularly grave risks associated with the dissemination of terrorist content, the decisions adopted by the competent judicial authorities on the basis of this Regulation could derogate from the approach established in Article 15(1) of Directive 2000/31/EC, as regards certain specific, targeted measures, the adoption of which is necessary for overriding public security reasons. Before adopting such decisions, the competent judicial authority should strike a fair balance between the public interest objectives and the fundamental rights involved, in particular, the freedom of expression and information and the freedom to conduct a business, and provide appropriate justification.
Amendment 181 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) To ensure proportionality, the period of preservation should be limited to six months to allow the content providers sufficient time to initiate the review process and to enable law enforcement access to relevant data for the investigation and prosecution of terrorist offences. However, this period may be prolonged for the period that is necessary in case the review proceedings are initiated but not finalised within the six months period upon request by the authority carrying out the review. This duration should be sufficient to allow law enforcement authorities to preserve the necessary evidence in relation to investigations, while ensuring the balance with the fundamental rights concerned. Related data should be erased after this six months period.
Amendment 183 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) This Regulation does not affect the procedural guarantees and procedural investigation measures related to the access to content and related data preserved for the purposes of the investigation and prosecution of terrorist offences, as regulated under the national law of the Member States, and under Union legislation. Member States should lay down clear and precise rules indicating in what circumstances and under what conditions competent national authorities can access the preserved content and any related data, aiming in particular at securing the effective exercise of fundamental rights and prevent fundamental rights violations. Access to such content and data must be subject to a prior review by a court or independent administrative body, expect in cases of validly established urgency.
Amendment 198 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) Effective legal protection according to Article 19 TEU and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union requires that persons are able to ascertain the reasons upon which the content uploaded by them has been removed or access to it disabled. For that purpose, the hosting service provider should make available to the content provider meaningful information enabling the content provider to contest the decision. However, this does not necessarily require a notification to the content provider. Depending on the circumstances, hosting service providers may replace content which is considered terrorist content, with a message that it has been removed or disabled in accordance with this Regulation. Further information about the reasons as well asfor the removal, as well as copy of the removal order and information of the possibilities for the content provider to contest the decision should be given upon request. Where competent authorities decide that for reasons of public security including in the context of an investigation, it is considered inappropriate or counter- productive to directly notify the content provider of the removal or disabling of content, they should inform the hosting service provider.
Amendment 256 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. This Regulation lays down uniform rules to prevent the misuse of hosting services for the public dissemination of terrorist content online. It lays down in particular:
Amendment 264 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) rules on duties of care to be applied by hosting service providers in order to prevent the public dissemination of terrorist content through their services and ensure, where necessary, its swift removal;
Amendment 291 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) 'hosting service provider' means a provider of information society services consisting in the storage of information provided by and at the request of the content provider and in making the information stored available to third partiese public;
Amendment 325 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b
(b) encouraging the contribution to terrorist offencespromoting the activities of a terrorist group, in particular by inciting, soliciting or advocating persons or a group of persons to participate in the activities of a terrorist group, including by supplying information or material resources or by funding its activities in any way;
Amendment 340 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point d a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point d a (new)
(d a) provides instruction on the making or use of explosives, firearms or other weapons or noxious or hazardous substances, or on other specific methods or techniques, for the purpose of committing, or contributing to the commission of, terrorist offences.
Amendment 341 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point d b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point d b (new)
(d b) The expression of radical, polemic or controversial views in the public debate on sensitive political questions shall however not be considered terrorist content.
Amendment 350 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
(6) ‘dissemination of terrorist content’ means making terrorist content available to third partiese public on the hosting service providers’ services;
Amendment 379 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. The competent authority shall have the power to issue a decision requiring the hosting service provider to remove terrorist content or disable access to it. Where the competent authority is not a judicial authority or where the removal order is not based on a judicial authority’s decision, the removal order addressed to the hosting service provider shall be at the same time submitted for review to an independent judicial authority determined in accordance with national law. This judicial authority shall notify the competent authority and the hosting service provider of its decision within twenty-four hours from the receipt of the removal order.
Amendment 389 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. Hosting service providers shall remove terrorist content or disable access to it within one hour from receipt of the removal order. In exceptional circumstances where the competent authority stipulates in the removal order that the particular content poses an imminent threat, hosting providers shall remove content or disable access to it within a period shorter than twenty-four hours from the receipt of the removal order. The period shall be specifically defined by the competent authority in the removal order and it cannot be less than one hour from the receipt of the removal order, taking into account the time of the addressee hosting service provider. Where the judicial authority conducting a review pursuant to paragraph 1 issues a decision that does not confirm the removal order’s legality, the competent authority shall ensure the immediate restoration of such content, provided it has already been removed or access to it disabled.
Amendment 418 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. Upon request by the hosting service provider or by the content provider, the competent authority shall provide a detailed statement of reasonscopy of the removal order including a detailed statement of reasons, and any information about the available legal remedies to appeal against removal orders before a court, without prejudice to the obligation of the hosting service provider to comply with the removal order within the deadline set out in paragraph 2.
Amendment 421 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Where the competent authority is not a judicial authority, or where the removal order is not based on a judicial authority’s decision, the removal order addressed to the hosting service provider shall be at the same time submitted to an independent judicial authority determined in accordance with the national law. This judicial authority shall notify the competent authority and the hosting service provider of its decision within twenty-four hours from the receipt of the removal order.
Amendment 480 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) preventing the re-upload of content which has previously been removed on the basis of the removal order or to which access has been disabled because it is considered to be terrorist content;
Amendment 519 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5
Article 6 – paragraph 5
5. A hosting service provider may, at any time, request the competent authority referred to in Article 17(1)(c) a review and, where appropriate, to revoke a request or decision pursuant to paragraphs 2, 3, and 4 respectively. Decisions taken pursuant to Article 6 (4) shall be subject to review by a court. The competent authority shall provide a reasoned decision within a reasonable period of time after receiving the request by the hosting service provider.
Amendment 532 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) Except in cases of validly establishes urgency, access to terrorist content and related data for any of the purposes under point (b) shall be authorised only after a prior review by a court or other independent administrative authority according to national and European legislation.
Amendment 537 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. The terrorist content and related data referred to in paragraph 1 shall be preserved for six months. The terrorist content shall, upon request from the competent authority or court, be preserved for a longer period when and for as long as necessary for ongoing proceedings of administrative or judicial review referred to in paragraph 1(a). Related data preserved shall be erased after this period.
Amendment 604 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. Upon request of the content provider, the hosting service provider shall inform the content provider about the reasons for the removal or disabling of access and possibilities to contest the decision and shall provide him or her with a copy of the removal order issues according to Article 4 upon request.