Monthly Archives: December 2013

Gandhi, Trusteeship and Intellectual Property Law

by R. Neethu

In 1939 Gandhi wrote: “My Trusteeship concept will survive all other theories” (Harijan, 16-12-1939, p. 376). Though his concept was articulated in reference to colonialism and independence, it has managed to survive the passage of time, becoming revitalized in this twenty-first century. The root of the Gandhian doctrine is equal distribution of resources. The resources of the world are held in common, and hence anyone who secures the bridle to control the use of resources needs to be reminded about the ‘trusteeship role’ that she has in the exploitation and utilization of such resources.  Continue reading

The United States National Security Agency as a “Good Neighbor”? The US Review Group on Intelligence and Communications Technologies and the Surveillance of Foreigners

UPDATE: The New York Times reported that in a speech on January 17, 2014, US President Obama said that “he was taking the ‘unprecedented step’ of extending privacy safeguards to non-Americans, including requiring that data collected abroad be deleted after a certain period and limiting its use to specific security requirements, like counterterrorism and cybersecurity.’The bottom line,’ he said, ‘is that people around the world — regardless of their nationality — should know that the United States is not spying on ordinary people who don’t threaten our national security.’ The NYT added that “Mr. Obama said that new safeguards would limit the duration that the government can hold personal information about foreigners and restrict its use. While he acknowledged the United State’s responsibility to ask ‘tough questions’ about its technological capabilities, he made clear that foreigners overseas do not enjoy the same protections as U.S. citizens. ‘This is not unique to America,’ he said. ‘Few, if any, spy agencies around the world constrain their activities beyond their own borders.’”

These new safeguards are included in Presidential Policy Directive 28 Policies and Procedures (pdf)

See also NSA PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT 03 February 2015: Administration Releases Report on Presidential Policy Directive-28/Signals Intelligence Activities; NSA Releases Specific Procedures to Implement

Daniel Severson, American Surveillance of Non-U.S. Persons: Why New Privacy Protections Offer Only Cosmetic Change, 56 Harv. Int’l L. J. 465 (2015) (pdf)

On December 12, 2013 the US President’s Review Group on Intelligence and Communications Technologies submitted its report and recommendations concerning the National Security Agency’s surveillance practices. The report suggests reforms that would limit US surveillance of foreigners in respect of their right to privacy.

Recommendation 13 suggests, inter alia, that such surveillance, (1) be authorized by duly enacted laws or properly authorized executive orders;  (2) be directed exclusively at the national security of the United States or its allies; (3) not disseminate information about foreigners if the information is not relevant to protecting the national security of the US or its allies; (4)  not target foreigners located outside the US based solely on their political views or religious convictions; and (5) be subject to careful oversight and to the highest degree of transparency consistent with protecting the national security of the US and its allies.

Recommendation 14 provides that “in the absence of a specific and compelling showing, the US Government should follow the model of the Department of Homeland Security, and apply the Privacy Act of 1974 in the same way to both US persons and non-US persons.”

The reasons invoked for these recommendations are striking. Continue reading

The Bali WTO Ministerial Conference’s decision on public stockholding for food security and the impact on others

By An Hertogen

The WTO 9th Ministerial Conference in Bali was billed in the media as the WTO’s last chance saloon to demonstrate its relevance in an era where the spotlight shines brightest on high-profile regional trade liberalization negotiations such as the TPPA and the TTIP. With the stakes raised, WTO Members agreed on December 7–one day past the original deadline as is so often the case at international negotiations–on the Bali Package that included, amongst others, a decision on public stockholding by developing countries for food security purposes.

The central question on public stockholding is whether developing countries can, in a WTO compatible way, stockpile food staples such as rice and wheat to ensure stable incomes for their farmers while at the same time guaranteeing those on low incomes access to basic foods at affordable prices. Lurking beneath the surface is the tension between trade liberalization commitments with the right to food. Continue reading