MONTEVIDEO - Freedom of expression worldwide has been under
threat since agents of the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) last
week seized two Internet servers hosting websites of the Independent Media
Centers. In Latin America, Indymedia Brazil and Uruguay are directly affected.
"The incident resembles a Kafka novel," Pablo Ortellado of Indymedia
Brazil told IPS in an e-mail interview. "Our equipment was seized and we
don't exactly know when, by whom or why."
The servers confiscated on Oct. 7 were located in the UK premises of
Rackspace, a U.S.-based company, and hosted 21 sites.
Indymedia is a network of more than 140 websites worldwide. It was
established in 1999 to report alternative viewpoints on the World Trade
Organization's conference in Seattle, and is now a major source of
information for the anti-globalization movement.
Anyone can publish on Indymedia. According to "Libertinus," an activist
at Indymedia Uruguay, the medium is one of the "most effective forms of
free flow of information."
Indymedia Brazil managed to return online 24 hours after the seizure.
Still, some of their material is missing. For Indymedia in Uruguay, one of
the smallest Latin American countries, the situation is much more precarious.
"If the recovery work is going well, the entire website might be back on
air next week," reckons Libertinus. Yet, "a great part will be impossible
to retrieve, in particular the multimedia archives," the activist told IPS.
The main consequences are, however, political rather than technical,
claims Ortellado, as the incident demonstrated that a government can seize
equipment of an independent communication medium in a foreign country, on
the basis of foreign law, without formal charges and without being required
to release information about its actions.
Until now, nobody seems to know why Indymedia was targeted. The seizure
could be related to the publication of pictures on one of its French sites,
showing Swiss undercover police photographing protestors. If this suspicion
is confirmed, says Ortellado, we will have witnessed the violation of civil
rights on a global scale.
"Swiss police, protesting against news on a French website hosted on an
English server get the American government to seize the server and take
more than 20 independent media sites off-line," he says.
Libertinus believes the incident was an intentional attempt at sabotage,
to intimidate a network that has been growing considerably in the past
months, and represents a threat to the world's powerful.
The authorities of at least four countries, Switzerland, Italy, the
United Kingdom and the United States, might be involved in the seizure,
suggests an Indymedia press release.
Federal prosecutors in both Switzerland and Italy have confirmed they
are investigating Indymedia, and the Italian prosecutor reportedly said
there are suspicions the network may "support terrorism," says Indymedia.
A representative for the network in the United States said the group
still has received no official explanation for the shutdown. "But
apparently this morning the Swiss said they had never asked the FBI to
seize the servers, just that they were looking at the photos (of undercover
police)," David Meieran of Indymedia Pittsburgh told IPS.
"Ten to 15 days ago there was a communication between the FBI and
Rackspace, although we were not informed of this. It's a plausible
inference that these photos were involved," he added.
To date, six of the websites had resumed operating, said Meieran.
In a statement issued Oct. 8, Rackspace claims to have acted "in
compliance with a court order pursuant to a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty
(MLAT), which establishes procedures for countries to assist each other in
investigations such as international terrorism, kidnapping and money
laundering."
However, representatives of the two Latin American sites do not accept
Rackspace's explanation. "It is no justification but an excuse allowing the
FBI to use their methods all over the world," says Libertinus. Ortellado
calls the incident a serious affront against freedom of expression and of
the press.
"If the American government was able to force an American company based
in a foreign country to hand over the servers of a media organization using
arbitrary methods and without going through a transparent judicial process,
there is no reason why the same methods could not be used again in other
circumstances, in other countries, targeting other organizations."
Indymedia is currently being working with the Electronic Frontier
Foundation (EFF) on possible responses it could take to the seizure.
According to Ortellado, other organizations such as the Center for
Constitutional Rights have offered their assistance.
EFF Staff Attorney Kurt Opsahl writes on the organization's website:
"This seizure has grave implications for free speech and privacy. The
constitution does not permit the government unilaterally to cut off the
speech of an independent media outlet, especially without providing a
reason or even allowing Indymedia the information necessary to contest the
seizure."
According to the general secretary of the International Federation of
Journalists (IFJ), Aidan White, "We have witnessed an intolerable and
intrusive international police operation against a network specializing in
independent journalism. The way this has been done smacks more of
intimidation of legitimate journalistic inquiry than crime-busting."
In an Indymedia news release, Libertinus explains the particular
consequences of the seizure for his country. "Uruguay has a long history of
media repression. We don't have the money to pay for web hosting, and so we
rely on the solidarity of other countries."
"Actions like the seizure of the servers make the whole world insecure for
free media. Uruguay's national elections will take place on Oct. 31. It's a
bad time for this to happen."
With reporting by Katherine Stapp in New York.
© Copyright 2004 IPS - Inter Press Service
###