Embed Notice

HTML Code

<blockquote style="position: relative; padding-left: 55px;"><section><a href="https://chaos.social/users/andre_meister/statuses/111176512143200697">Andre Meister (andre_meister@chaos.social)'s status on Thursday, 05-Oct-2023 17:30:43 JST</a><a href="https://chaos.social/@andre_meister" title="andre_meister@chaos.social"><img src="https://gnusocial.jp/avatar/94548-48-20230203193755.webp" width="48" height="48" alt="Andre Meister" style="position: absolute; left: 0; top: 0;">Andre Meister</a><div><a href="https://chaos.social/@andre_meister/111165087812210333" rel="in-reply-to">in reply to</a><ul><li></ul></div></section><article><p>Ylva Johansson hat dem LIBE-Ausschuss geantwortet. Die EU-Kommissarin sieht kein Problem: "Es gibt kein Fehlverhalten." Sie behauptet, nicht nur Chatkontrolle-Befürworter zu treffen, sondern auch Gegner. Das ist falsch, bis heute lehnt sie ein Treffen mit <a href="https://eupolicy.social/@edri">@edri</a> ab. Wir veröffentlichen ihren Brief: <a href="https://netzpolitik.org/wp-upload/2023/10/2023-10-03_Johansson_LIBE_CSAM.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://netzpolitik.org/wp-upload/2023/10/2023-10-03_Johansson_LIBE_CSAM.pdf</a> <a href="https://netzpolitik.org/2023/chatkontrolle-eu-innenkommissarin-johansson-weist-lobby-vorwuerfe-zurueck/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://netzpolitik.org/2023/chatkontrolle-eu-innenkommissarin-johansson-weist-lobby-vorwuerfe-zurueck/</a></p></article><footer><a rel="bookmark" href="https://gnusocial.jp/conversation/2141396#notice-4204200">In conversation</a><time datetime="2023-10-05T17:30:43+09:00" title="Thursday, 05-Oct-2023 17:30:43 JST">Thursday, 05-Oct-2023 17:30:43 JST</time> <span>from <span><a href="https://chaos.social/@andre_meister/111176512143200697" rel="external" title="Sent from chaos.social via ActivityPub">chaos.social</a></span></span><a href="https://chaos.social/@andre_meister/111176512143200697">permalink</a><h4>Attachments</h4><ol><li><label><a rel="external" href="https://gnusocial.jp/attachment/1607463">Honourable Members of the European Parliament,Thank you for your letter and the opportunity to comment.In your letter you express concerns regarding undue influence and economic interests in relation to the proposal for a Regulation laying down rules to prevent and combat child sexual abuse.This proposal is about protecting children from sexual violence. At its core is the need to balance all fundamental rights at stake, including those of children. In preparation of this proposal the normal consultative procedures were followed. Those consultations were broad and objective.The media article you refer to, published in various versions by different media, is an attempt to misrepresent the normal consultative work of the Commission. In this case consultation with tech companies or with survivors of child sexual abuse.To ensure the collection of the necessary evidence to help ensure the balance of fundamental rights – like the right to physical and mental integrity of children and the right to privacy – the Commission conducted extensive consultations with a wide variety of stakeholders for two years during the preparation of the proposal.</a></label><br><a href="https://assets.chaos.social/media_attachments/files/111/176/508/443/883/949/original/843b742e09242dbf.jpg" rel="external">https://assets.chaos.social/media_attachments/files/111/176/508/443/883/949/original/843b742e09242dbf.jpg</a></li><li><label><a rel="external" href="https://gnusocial.jp/attachment/1607464">This included a wide range of experts from NGOs focused on privacy rights, NGOs focused on children’s rights, companies, academia, national authorities, and others. The impact assessment accompanying the proposal includes a dedicated section summarising these consultations (see its Annex 2).The interactions with a variety of stakeholders are an essential part of the legislative process, as you are aware. The article referred to in your letter focuses on the interactions of the Commission with a small number of groups protecting children’s rights, including survivors.By singling out this one group in the consultative process, it unfairly suggests favouritism. It also has the unfortunate consequence of undermining the legitimacy of these survivor groups, groups that represent some of the most vulnerable in society.Let me remind you that, as the result of a Commission consultative process, the relevant services and Directorate Generals have had extensive exchanges with privacy rights organisations and online service providers opposed to additional legal obligations.Let the text of the proposal speak for itself. One of its key pillars is technological neutrality. […]</a></label><br><a href="https://assets.chaos.social/media_attachments/files/111/176/508/506/621/097/original/2afa44ce65ad705d.jpg" rel="external">https://assets.chaos.social/media_attachments/files/111/176/508/506/621/097/original/2afa44ce65ad705d.jpg</a></li><li><label><a rel="external" href="https://gnusocial.jp/attachment/1607465">My belief is that this article presents publicly available information as revelations, juxtaposes unrelated events and opinions to insinuate conspiracy. There is no basis. Indeed, on close reading of the article there is not even an explicit accusation.It seems designed to give the impression of wrongdoing.Let me assure you – there is none.I am confident that the Honourable Members of the Parliament, those in the LIBE Committee, will judge the regulation on its merits, will continue to ensure the balance and the respect of all the fundamental rights at stake, regardless of sensationalist media, and will continue ensuring that children’s rights are treated equally to other fundamental rights. This is also the wish of the vast majority of EU citizens, as the recent Eurobarometer shows, who massively support the legislative proposal and the proper balance of all fundamental rights. It is therefore our shared responsibility as politicians to ensure that balance and do all we can to provide all children a future free from sexual abuse and its devastating, life-long consequences.Yours sincerely,Ylva Johansson</a></label><br><a href="https://assets.chaos.social/media_attachments/files/111/176/508/539/592/110/original/3c154f9fe8d031ed.jpg" rel="external">https://assets.chaos.social/media_attachments/files/111/176/508/539/592/110/original/3c154f9fe8d031ed.jpg</a></li><li><label><a rel="external" href="https://gnusocial.jp/attachment/1607466">Untitled attachment</a></label><br></li><li><article><header><div>Domain not in remote thumbnail source whitelist: cdn.netzpolitik.org</div><h5><a href="https://netzpolitik.org/2023/chatkontrolle-eu-innenkommissarin-johansson-weist-lobby-vorwuerfe-zurueck/">EU-Innenkommissarin Johansson weist Lobby-Vorwürfe zurück</a></h5><div> from <span>andre</span></div></header><div>Wegen der Lobby-Verflechtungen bei der Chatkontrolle steht Ylva Johansson in der Kritik. In einer Stellungnahme an den EU-Innenausschuss, die wir im Volltext veröffentlichen, wirft sie nun recherchierenden Medien</div><footer></footer></article></li></ol></footer></blockquote>

Corresponding Notice

Embed this notice
Andre Meister (andre_meister@chaos.social)'s status on Thursday, 05-Oct-2023 17:30:43 JSTAndre Meister
in reply to
- EDRi
Ylva Johansson hat dem LIBE-Ausschuss geantwortet. Die EU-Kommissarin sieht kein Problem: "Es gibt kein Fehlverhalten." Sie behauptet, nicht nur Chatkontrolle-Befürworter zu treffen, sondern auch Gegner. Das ist falsch, bis heute lehnt sie ein Treffen mit @edri ab. Wir veröffentlichen ihren Brief: https://netzpolitik.org/wp-upload/2023/10/2023-10-03_Johansson_LIBE_CSAM.pdf https://netzpolitik.org/2023/chatkontrolle-eu-innenkommissarin-johansson-weist-lobby-vorwuerfe-zurueck/
In conversation2 years ago from chaos.socialpermalink
Attachments

Public

Embed Notice

HTML Code

Corresponding Notice