-
36C3 preroll music
-
Robert Tibbo: Thank you for your patience
tonight. It was a little bit hectic in my
-
getting here on time. So I do apologize.
But thank you for all being here tonight.
-
Myself and the Snowden refugees, Mr.
Snowden, we really appreciate your
-
attendance here. The people watching the
livestream and the support for my
-
clients. And just very briefly, in case
there are a few people out there, I met
-
Mr. Snowden in 2013, June in Hong Kong.
And that's when he made the globally
-
significant disclosures of the Five Eyes
electronic mass surveillance program. And
-
it was at that time that I represented Mr.
Snowden in Hong Kong. And thereafter. And
-
it was also at that time that I asked for
brave adults, incredibly courageous adults
-
who exercised decisions of conscience to
provide Mr. Snowden with a refuge, with
-
shelter, humanity, compassion and caring.
And to introduce them again. Briefly,
-
Vanessa, on the left, if you're facing the
screen from the Philippines to her right.
-
To her left. A military deserter from Sri
Lanka. Nadeka from Sri Lanka. And on the
-
far, far left supporting from Sri Lanka.
And these are the three children. On the
-
bottom left is Keana, and beside her is
her stepsister, Satyamdi. And support is
-
holding a little boy Dinath.
Applause
-
What what I'm gonna do this evening before
providing a brief update on the Snowden
-
refugee status. I'm gonna go through a bit
of law, I think, at this stage. There's
-
been such marginalization, demonization,
confusion about what refugees are and
-
what, you know, what is required to
qualify as a refugee. I'm gonna go through
-
a number of international law and at the
same time. Beyond that, I'm gonna go
-
through what's happening globally and in
my view, where we're really at a crisis in
-
terms of authoritarian leaders
democratically elected and ignoring their
-
constitutions, violating them, blatantly
ignoring international law. So very
-
briefly, I've just listed some of the most
crucial or core conventions that protect
-
human rights from the U.N. Universal
Declaration of Human Rights to the UN
-
Convention Against Torture. And of course,
the UN Convention relating to the Status
-
of Refugees and its protocol. I'm also
mentioning the Rome Statute of the
-
International Criminal Court, because this
is a court where this court itself is now
-
being attacked by states around the world,
nations around the world. I'm also
-
mentioning customary international law,
which is an international norm, where due
-
to practice, the practice becomes so
pervasive that countries no need, no
-
longer need to sign up to an international
treaty. That treaty becomes part of
-
customary law. It doesn't have to be
written anywhere. Now, the core document
-
I'm going to discuss is the Refugee
Convention and Article 33 and some are sub
-
paragraph one is the core. It's the core
part of refugee protection and that is no
-
state shall expel return. And the legal
word is refoul means to return. So no
-
state is going to should return any
refugee. And that also includes any
-
refugee claimant out of their jurisdiction
where their life or freedom are at risk,
-
and that the life and freedom also
includes any serious harm. And there
-
are five fundamental grounds to secure
refugee status, race, religion,
-
nationality and political opinion. These
are the classical four. There's a fifth
-
called social group. And it's not a
closed end category. It's actually open
-
ended because as you know, over time, we
recognize that different human rights
-
abuses occur affecting different social
groups that don't fall into the four
-
classic categories. So just a review
just to interpret Article 33. As I
-
mentioned, liberty and life also includes
serious harm. It's a forward looking test.
-
So if an asylum seeker or refugee crosses
a border into another country, they don't
-
need to prove that they actually suffered
any harm or any threats or any risks or
-
any threats or harms or loss of liberty or
serious harm before they leave their
-
jurisdiction into another jurisdiction.
That person has to show they're unable or
-
unwilling to seek help from the police or
the state. And that's quite often the case
-
because of corruption or the state itself
is the persecutor. And there must be a
-
nexus to one of the five grounds. I'm
going to focus on political opinion and
-
political opinion can be expressed by an
individual verbally through their physical
-
actions. The presence with others and
political opinion is connected to the
-
right of freedom of expression. And one
thing I would stress is that freedom of
-
expression under the law is not just your
right to say something. It's also your
-
right to receive information, to be
present, to be able to hear and listen or
-
record. And the freedom of expression
connects fundamentally to freedom of
-
association, assembly and mobility. Lot of
people misunderstand that persecution for
-
political opinion is the persecutor. Is
that the opinion comes from the persecuted
-
person. In fact. The Refugee Convention
clearly states, it is the opinion of the
-
persecutor that counts. So, for example,
I've had clients from South Asia. One case
-
was of a farmer who just had no political
opinion, but was at a rally in a public
-
place and just was standing on a corner
and was unaware there was a political
-
opponent standing near him. Those in power
saw my client. Inferred that my client
-
must be supporting the opposition. And
from that day onward, persecuted him,
-
burned down his house, destroyed his farm
and he fled for his life. So the legal
-
test is the opinion or the perception of
the persecutory. Now, I'd like to go to
-
the social group category. This is really
important, because this relates to some of
-
my clients and in particular the Snowden
refugees. And a social group is a
-
particular group of people that are
connected or linked through a shared
-
characteristic or there's a perception by
society that they, you know, having
-
certain characteristics that they form a
group. These characteristics are typically
-
historical and relate fundamentally to an
individual's identity and conscience.
-
Usually they're unchangeable. And if
they're not unchangeable, that person
-
should not have to change those character
characteristics, because they are
-
fundamental to their identity or
conscience. If they can be changed, they
-
still should not be changed because
they're linked to that person's
-
fundamental exercise of human rights. The
Snowden refugees fall into the social
-
group category. Aside from having claims
with Hong Kong and the Canadian government
-
under political opinion for supporting
helping Mr. Snowden, they form the unique
-
social group that I think everyone in the
world recognizes. They are the Snowden
-
refugees and the social group are
individuals that protect whistleblowers.
-
That's the social category.
Applause
-
One thing I'll stress is that we hear
about whistleblowers and public support
-
for whistleblowers, not protection. Public
support for journalists to carry out their
-
duties. Quite often working or reporting,
what whistleblowers want to disclose. But
-
there is not enough in, in terms of legal
applications, there's not enough in terms
-
of public awareness, the importance of the
average individual on the street, anybody
-
on the street who may one day be faced
with, what the Snowden refugees were faced
-
with and make extraordinary decisions of
conscience to help a whistleblower. I'm
-
mentioning the CAT Convention, the United
Nations Convention of Torture. Torture is
-
a non-derogable right. It's not to be
tortured is a non-derogable right. There
-
is no circumstances that exist that can
justify any state or private party
-
torturing an individual. And I also
mentioned the International Covenant on
-
Civil and Political Rights and 3, 3 core
rights here are the right to life and that
-
it should not be arbitrarily taken.
Tortures repeated here, but also cruel,
-
inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment. And this is a a non-derogable
-
right. No one should ever be subjected to
this. And then the last one I'm going to
-
mention, I apologize, is liberty and
security in particular, arbitrary arrest
-
and arbitrary detention. And as we see
globally today, countries around the world
-
where there's mass protests against
government corruption, government abuses,
-
a lack of freedoms. Governments are
arbitrarily using arbitrary arrest and
-
detention to make people disappear. To
shut them up. No need to mention or point
-
to the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights. And in there, as well as Article
-
31 of the Refugee Convention, that every
refugee claimant has an absolute right to
-
cross a border if they're at risk of
losing their liberty, their life or
-
serious harm. And unfortunately, we're
living in a world today where countries
-
and around the world are putting up walls
that are real, walls that are virtual.
-
Because they do not want to address or
comply with their international
-
obligations to help the most vulnerable.
And what nation states are doing is
-
they're using propaganda, inaccurate
information, false information to
-
criminalize legitimate asylum seekers and
refugees, to try to categorize them as
-
illegal immigrants, economic migrants. And
with all of this, we're seeing an erosion
-
of international law and constitutional
law. And one area where nations have been
-
very clever is they've been using the
strategy of constructive refoulement. Now
-
refoulement means to return. And in Hong
Kong, for example, the government achieves
-
constructive refoulement, which basically
means, they create an environment that
-
makes it intolerable for an individual to
remain in that jurisdiction. And that in
-
the end, that person's mental and physical
integrity is so compromised, they make a
-
decision to return their home country to
take a risk. So whether they're going to
-
live or die or lose their liberty or not.
So in Hong Kong, for example, the
-
government does not provide full
humanitarian assistance. They criminalize
-
work. There's no education allowed for
adults. And employment is prohibited so
-
that there's no way for the individual to
be making money or participating in a
-
meaningful way in society. And in the end,
that person becomes so compromised, they
-
decide to leave. The governments create
these circumstances to violate their
-
constitutional rights, international equal
rights, by making them leave, by making
-
the circumstances intolerable. You're
seeing a global trend of criminalization
-
and ill treatment of asylum seekers.
You've seen similar legislative and policy
-
and propaganda frameworks in Austria,
Denmark and Hungary. We've all seen the
-
asylum seekers who've lost their lives
crossing the Mediterranean. In the United
-
States we've seen separation of children
separated from families, a tactic used by
-
the US government. The children held in
detention centers, deprived of blankets,
-
soap, toothpaste, a lack of monitoring and
care for the welfare and health of these
-
children. Some have died and more
recently. And this is a tactic also used
-
by the Hong Kong government, but in a
different way. Asylum seekers who are
-
outside the U.S. jurisdiction, the
immigration officers put incorrect
-
addresses recorded in the system, so that
they cannot receive legal notifications
-
from the U.S. government. You've seen the
same thing in Hong Kong. I know firsthand.
-
I've seen asylum seekers go to the
immigration and removal assessment
-
section, try to hand in a document stating
that they're raising a claim as a
-
protection claimant for refugee status or
torture. And there are security guards at
-
the door that basic that tell them go
away. It's not acceptable. Not immigration
-
officers. And if they do manage to submit
raising their refugee asylum claims, I've
-
I've had too many clients, who've been
told you're not using the right words to
-
raise a claim that you're afraid you're
gonna die or you're afraid you're going to
-
be hurt. So these are tactics that deny,
what I would describe, the due process
-
rights of these votes, this vulnerable
groups. And I do want to mention Thailand
-
in terms of the treatment of asylum
seekers. And that they have found mass
-
graves in Thailand has been complicit in
human trafficking of the Rohingya. Now,
-
there's a few quotes I'd like to to read,
and this is from the former U.N. high
-
commissioner for Human Rights. And it was
right for us -not just to have remembered
-
Mandela's greatness, but to have almost
unconsciously contrasted it with all the
-
narrow politicians, who continue to
proliferate across the face of the world.
-
Authoritarian in nature, many of them are
wily political in-fighters, but most are
-
of the thin mind and faint humanity, prone
to fan division and intolerance. And just
-
for the sake of securing their political
ambition, while some do this more openly
-
than others, all are well aware what they
practice comes at the expense of
-
vulnerable humans. And the U.N. high
commissioner goes on to state to them, I
-
say you may seize power or stubbornly hold
onto it, by playing on and stoking the
-
fears of your followers. You may
congratulate yourselves for this and you
-
may think yourself so clever for it. But
we know all you've done is to copy the
-
behavior of previous generations of once
strong but ultimately catastrophic,
-
leaders and politicians. Yours will, in
the end, become a mouse like global
-
reputation, never the fine example of the
leader you think you are, and never even
-
close to a Mandela.
Applause
-
To deserve global respect, you must begin
to follow his example---committing to the
-
spirit and letter of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights. Hong Kong
-
does not recognize the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights. Hong Kong
-
doesn't recognize the UN convention
relating to the Status of Refugees.
-
Michelle Bachelet, the current U.N. high
commissioner, she stated early this year
-
"the report outlines our efforts to assist
States to uphold all human rights, at a
-
time when humanity faces many serious
challenges. These include the existential
-
threat of climate change; technological
developments: unbearable civilian
-
suffering in multiple armed conflicts,
displacement, youth unemployment,
-
structural economic injustices, xenophobia
and hate speech, and -- a focus on my
-
statement today --- gross inequalities".
Me specially continues focusing on these
-
inequalities and I'm just going to read at
the bottom. Yet in several cases they are
-
being met with violent and excessive use
of force, arbitrary detentions, torture,
-
even alleged summary extrajudicial
killings. People are protesting. People
-
are protesting at the behavior of
government and authoritarian leaders. And
-
I put my mind to how to describe what's
going on. And in the best way I've been
-
able to describe it is, that these
authoritarian leaders, democratic,
-
elected, have become unhinged,
disconnected from from the populace. And
-
most recently, especially as talked about
global protests, and she stated just a few
-
months ago, I fear that we are moving
farther away, further away from the global
-
solutions to the global problems due to
two clear trends that are taking us in the
-
opposite directions. Today, in places with
very different circumstances, level of
-
development and political situations,
we're seeing an outpouring of popular
-
discontent and mass protests or their
suppression with the firm hand of the
-
state in every region. And Hong Kong is
included in here and I'll just part move
-
forward. We see the desperate need for
dialog. The use of unnecessary and
-
disproportionate force
against people holding dissenting views
-
and arrests of individuals exercising
their rights to freedom of expression and
-
peaceful assembly can only exacerbate
tensions, seriously undermining the space
-
for dialog. In my view, we are in crisis.
There is a global crisis. What I thought I
-
would do is to give some tangible examples
through the casework I do. Narendra Modi.
-
His platform has been Hindu nationalism,
and that's been at the expense of
-
religious minorities and ethnic minorities
in India. In particular, the Muslim
-
population. And what Modi has done and
this is this is a thread that runs through
-
what happens in other jurisdictions,
including Hong Kong, is when you have
-
nationalism and minorities are targeted by
the government or they're discriminated
-
against. Third parties in the private
sector or related to politicians act on
-
their own. And when the state allows that
to happen, we call that state
-
acquiescence. And in India, that's what
we're seeing. Back here. Recently, there
-
was a deprivation of citizenship of 1.9
million people in Assam state, an
-
arbitrary act by Modi's government. And as
of last week, there was a new bill enacted
-
into law, granting citizenship to Hindus,
Buddhists and Christians from certain
-
Southeast Asian countries. But it excludes
Muslims and it also excludes the Sri
-
Lankan Tamils, for which there is a huge
number of refugees, who had fled from Sri
-
Lanka. And what Modi has done is all
contrary to Article 15 up to 28, and
-
that's prohibition of
discrimination based on religion, race and
-
place of birth. The tactics used by
governments today in doing what Modi has
-
done, it's being used all over the world.
The executive branch for the legislator
-
legislature passes legislation that's
unconstitutional and it may take a year or
-
two or three years before a court strikes
it down. But during that gap period, those
-
people who are discriminated against or
persecuted suffer. Often they have to flee
-
their homes. They had to flee their
country or they're hurt or they're killed.
-
So this is another way that democratically
elected leaders are utilizing the
-
government and the legal system to strip
away constitutional rights and rights
-
under international law. Sri Lanka,
extraordinarily good by Rajapaksa, accused
-
of war crimes, crimes against humanity and
genocide, was elected as Sri Lanka's new
-
president just a month ago. In 1987 to
1988, 1990, he was the commanding officer
-
in charge of the Mottola district, where
about eight years ago they found mass
-
graves. In 2009, he was accused of war
crimes, crimes against humanity and
-
genocide. At the end of the war bombing,
hospitals, civilian hospitals where they
-
were Tamils, actually judicial killings,
summary executions. And the
-
platform of Rutter Rajapaksa was based on
ethnicity and nationalism. And the
-
Philippines. Duterte came to power in
2016. It was on the platform that he would
-
carry out mass extrajudicial killings
against drug addicts and drug traffickers.
-
He had done that when he was mayor of
Davao City in southern Philippines. And in
-
June 2016, when he took power as president
of the country, he did exactly that to
-
over 20.000 Philipinos executed. The
president, the Philippines, the government
-
have threatened NGO, human rights
activists, ethnic minorities, Catholic
-
Church and even U.N. special rapporteurs.
And stunningly Duterte was actually
-
filmed. This was televised, where he in
his campaign and basically committing
-
crimes against humanity. He said "If
Germany had Hitler, the Philippines would
-
have. He said, pausing and pointing to
himself. Hitler massacred three million
-
Jews. There's three million drug addicts,
there are. I'd be happy to slaughter them.
-
And a year later, Donald Trump
congratulated Duterte on his war on drugs.
-
U.N. Special Rapporteur on the rights of
indigenous people, Victoria Tauli-Corpuz.
-
She fled the jurisdiction because the tar
tape put her on a her name on a terrorist
-
list. This is about state acquiescence to
human rights violations when a government
-
puts an individual's name on a list. And
what happened in the Philippines? Private
-
parties took the law into their own hands
and executed a number of people,
-
assassinated them. So that was the fear
for the UN special rapporteur, and she
-
fled the jurisdiction. Complaints were
filed with the International Criminal
-
Court for crimes against humanity against
Duterte. And also this UN special
-
rapporteur, Agnes Kellerman on summary and
extradition killings. Both the
-
International Criminal Court prosecutor
was threatened by Duterte and also the UN
-
Special Rapporteur. Most significantly,
the ICC prosecutor was threatened with
-
arrest, if she came to the Philippines to
investigate. She'd be assaulted and she'd
-
be killed. She'd be fed to the crocodiles.
Philippines officially withdrew from the
-
International Criminal Court, but that
still does not protect President Duterte.
-
Duterte may have committed possible war
crimes. I've mentioned a few here,
-
particularly calling for horrific crimes
to be committed against women. And the
-
People's Republic of China has been a
great supporter of Duterte today, and it's
-
understood that, because of the provisions
under the Rome Statute for the
-
International Criminal Court, that Duterte
would not be prosecuted. China would use
-
its veto power in the International
Criminal Court to prevent any prosecution
-
of him. Again, this is an example of how
states are interfering with violating or
-
making international law useless. The
People's Republic of China, the most
-
pressing example are the current
concentration or detention camps in China.
-
Of the Uighur Muslims, and despite the
China cable, satellite images and
-
witnesses, China denies that they've
arbitrarily arrested, arbitrarily detained
-
and disappeared over a million from
[unaudible] Xinjiang provice.
-
I'd like to mention Hong Kong
very briefly, and Hong Kong has had a
-
history of violating its own constitution
and international law. From the Sami al-
-
Saadi extraordinary rendition, where Hong
Kong deprived Mr. Saudi of all his due
-
process rights and its protections under
international law and handed him over the
-
UK and U.S. government on a rendition
flight in 2004. And that was the incident
-
that put fear that made, that gave me
great concern when Mr. Snowden was in Hong
-
Kong, that the Hong Kong government could
not be trusted to uphold its constitution,
-
to uphold international law. 2014 Occupy
protests, Ken Tsang, a politician. He was
-
hold tied, hands tied behind his back and
his legs and tortured by the police, and
-
it was caught on video and these officers
were convicted, but then they compared
-
them, the police compared themselves to
being persecuted as the Jewish people had
-
during the Holocaust. And that's on video
that's been publicly recorded. And 2018
-
Allen Lee and Ray Wong fled Hong Kong in
fear for their liberty and their and their
-
safety, and they were granted refugee
status by the German government, which was
-
the right thing to do. And this caused a
lot of outrage of the Hong Kong government
-
and Beijing. And right now we have the
Hong Kong protests, including arbitrary
-
arrest, arbitrary detention, cruel and
inhuman or degrading treatment and
-
punishment, torture, enforced
disappearances, cases of rape by the
-
police and actual extrajudicial killings.
I'm going to skip this. I still have
-
clients, my clients in Hong Kong, Snowden
refugees, and fortunately this March,
-
March of this year, Vanessa O'Dell and her
daughter Keana safely arrived in Canada,
-
having been granted refugee status.
Applause
-
This was a seven and a half year battle,
seven and a half years, and one thing I'll
-
say is that so many people gave up, so
many people said to me, you're not going
-
to win. It's taken too long. What? Why
don't you just move on with other cases?
-
Anyways, I believed that we'd be
successful. And we have.
-
Applause
Keana, in this photo, this is Keana on her
-
father's lap. And her father is still in
Hong Kong with her brother and sister.
-
Satyam de and Denath, and we would like to
see this family being reunited in Canada
-
and we're asking Canada to act fast, as
fast as possible. She has a sister who
-
only thinks about in Hong Kong something,
who only thinks about being reunited with
-
Keana in Montreal. And at this time, with
the with the police abuses, the government
-
abuses in Hong Kong Sethumdi she has been
traumatized and she suffered permanent
-
damage. The whole family is afraid. They
live in fear and they are at heightened
-
risk with the lawlessness in Hong Kong.
The lawlessness by the Hong Kong police. I
-
just want to share this picture, which was
taken by Jane Russell in August this year.
-
This is the Hong Kong Police Tactical Unit
in Fanling. And you'll notice that there's
-
no Hong Kong flag. And Jane Russell,
photojournalist, pointed this out. And it
-
was at that point we all realized that the
hand of Beijing was apparently acting
-
directly inside Hong Kong. Directing the
Hong Kong police. What's happened in Hong
-
Kong, is the same thing that you see in
Sri Lanka, in Bangladesh, Pakistan, India,
-
where the government allows the police to
commit abuses state sanctioned or the
-
police commit abuses and the government
turns a blind eye. And that amounts to
-
state acquiescence. And what's happened in
Hong Kong is, what you see classically in
-
Sri Lanka or the Philippines, where third
private parties take the law into their
-
own hands and go after innocent civilians
or peaceful protesters. Hong Kong has
-
become a very dangerous place today. And
my clients lives are at risk, at a
-
heightened risk. I thought I would share
this image taken by Keana's father of
-
[inaudible] during the protests.
And this is what these children are
-
growing up in this kind of environment
right now. Where really where they should
-
be, is in this environment. And this is
Vanessa and Keana in Montreal, Quebec, not
-
just earlier this month. Now, what I'd
like to do in saying that is I'd like to
-
invite Mr. Snowden to join us. Dom. Check.
Edward Snowden: Can anyone hear me? Thank
-
you.
Applause
-
We have very little time. So let me first
give thanks to Robert Tibbo. I know it's
-
not always fun for Rudy to sit through,
what is effectively a long lecture about
-
what's wrong with the world. But these
things matter and it's important that we
-
remember how they get better. I've been
thinking a lot this year and writing my
-
book, Permanent Record and after about the
state of the world and the direction of
-
our future.
laughing
-
I trust that each of you will understand
that in 2019 this was not an especially
-
enjoyable activity, but it's necessary.
And one of the bright spots for me in this
-
increasingly dark world has been the fact
that people like you, that CCC has
-
supported these families over the last few
years. They made a difference for me.
-
Think think about, what would have
happened if I wouldn't have been able to
-
get off the street. Think about what might
have happened to me. I think about the
-
fact that I wouldn't be able to talk to
you today and all these years since the
-
book that I wrote would not exist. It
might seem like a small thing, you know,
-
to you, to it to give a donation to help
out. But I believe that it really has
-
genuinely changed the future of these
brave families in a positive way. And so
-
when I'm thinking about everything that's
broken in the world. It got me thinking
-
about the lessons that can be taken from
them and how they fit into a larger
-
framework. We have pretty limited time
here. So I'm going to do something a
-
little bit unusual to try to summarize and
read a little passage from the book. What
-
makes a life? It's more than what we say.
More even than what we do. A life is also
-
about what we love and what we believe in.
For me, what I love and believe in the
-
most is connection, human connection and
the technologies by which that's achieved.
-
Those technologies include books, of
course. But for my generation, connection
-
has largely met the Internet. Now, before
a lot of you recoil, knowing how broken
-
the Internet, the toxic madness that's all
over it. I understand that for me, as it
-
was for, I believe many of you, when I
came to know it. The Internet was a very
-
different thing. It was a friend and a
parent. It was a community without borders
-
or limit. One voice and millions, a common
frontier that had been settled, but not
-
exploited by diverse tribes living
amicably enough side by side. Each member
-
which was free to choose their own name
and history and culture. Everyone wore
-
masks. And yet this culture of anonymity
through polyanomy produced more truth and
-
falsehood, because it was creative and
cooperative rather than commercial and
-
competitive. Certainly there was conflict,
but it was outweighed by goodwill and good
-
feelings. The true pioneering spirit.
You'll understand why I say, that the
-
internet today is in many ways
unrecognizable. It's worth noting that
-
this change has been a conscious choice,
the result of a systematic effort on the
-
part of a privileged few. The early rush
to turn commerce into e-commerce quickly
-
led to a bubble and then, just after the
term of the millennium, to a collapse.
-
After that, companies realized that people
who went online were far less interested
-
in spending than in sharing, and that the human
connection, the internet made possible,
-
could be monetized. If most of what people
wanted to do online, was to be able to
-
tell their family and their friends and
strangers what they were up to and to be
-
told what their family, friends and
strangers were up to in return, then all
-
companies had to do to figure out how to
put them was figure out how to put
-
themselves in the middle of those social
exchanges and turn them into profit. This
-
was the beginning of surveying capitalism
and the end of the Internet, as I know it
-
now. It was the creative web that
collapsed as countless beautiful,
-
difficult, individualized web sites were
shuttered. The promise of convenience led
-
people to exchange their personal sites,
which demanded constant and laborious
-
upkeep. As you are known for a Facebook
page and a Gmail account, the appearance
-
of ownership was easy to mistake for the
reality of it. But few of us understood it
-
at the time. None of the things that we go
on to share would belong to us anymore.
-
The successors to the emerge commerce
companies that had failed because they
-
couldn't find anything to sell, that we
were interested in. They now had a new
-
product to sell, and that product was us,
our attention, our activities, our
-
locations, our desires, everything about
us, that we revealed knowingly or
-
unknowingly, with or without consent, was
being surveilled and sold in secret so as
-
to delay the inevitable feeling violation
that is for most of us arriving now. And
-
this surveillance would go on to be
actively encouraged and even funded by an
-
army of governments greedy for the vast
volume of intelligence that they would
-
gain from these practices. Aside from logins
and financial transactions, hardly any
-
communications were encrypted in the early
twenty aughts, which meant that in many
-
cases governments didn't need to even
bother approaching the companies that were
-
running these platforms in order to know
what their customers were doing. They
-
could just spy on the world without
telling a soul. And now I ask you, is this
-
what the world should look like and how
did this come to be? We were there. We
-
were watching, and we thought we
controlled the system. We thought we ran
-
the system. We thought it was our
Internet. But here we are. Surveillance,
-
after all, is less about safety than it is
about control. And when you look around at
-
the union of technical and political
systems today, it seems that they intend
-
less to serve us than for us to serve
them. And it's funny talking about this at
-
CCC, because to me it it feels like a
hack. You know what is hacking, I'm sure,
-
all you guys have different definitions.
But in my definition, it's not just
-
programing. Of course, we wouldn't see
terms like bio hacking. Hacking is about
-
rules and the distance between how they
are believed to operate and how they
-
operate in fact. Hacking for me means,
coming to understand a system better than
-
its creators or its operators and using
that understanding to produce impossible
-
results, unexpected behavior. Thanks so
much. Now we'd like to think about hacks
-
in a positive light, but in the case of
these last few decades, it's our society
-
that was hacked. It is the whole of our
network. It is the Internet itself, that
-
they exploit. And you see that. That's the
thing. The choices that we make and the
-
things that you do. They have power and
doing nothing, that that's a choice. Now,
-
a lot of us like to think it's a willing
choice. We'd like to think that we're the
-
sole captains of our own destiny. And
that's the way it's supposed to be. That's
-
the way it was intended. That's the way we
designed the system. And yet the system
-
today. Somehow the actors within it spend
an enormous amount of energy trying to
-
make you forget, that the things you do
affect the outcome. They'll tell you not
-
to worry about it. That that it's not so
bad after all. You know, it could be
-
worse. But I say to you, it could be
better. And every time we hear those
-
words, that's what we need to say. Every
system in history, even the most powerful,
-
has been subject to change. And every hack
that is performed against us, can face a
-
patch and more in all of the trouble to
which these people have gone, to to make
-
the people broadly forget their own power,
they have forgotten something that I think
-
is fundamental. We can hack back. They run
the system. They may have won today. But
-
I've been thinking about this, look, we
all know the history and it has been a
-
dark time. But I'm here today in front of
you to say that tomorrow will be ours.
-
Change is coming and it is coming from
people who pay attention. People who care.
-
It will come from people like you, who
took the time out of the day, out of their
-
lives. The money out of their pocket to
travel. The time, the minutes of your life
-
to be here today, standing in solidarity,
talking, learning, sharing to show that
-
this broken world could very well be
better. We can change it. We can change
-
everything. One system, one rule at a
time. Thank you.
-
Applause
I just hope it's not kind of I no longer
-
have audio, so I'm afraid I won't be able
to.
-
Robert Tibbo: Ed, we've got Vanessa on the
screen, half the screen with you right
-
now. And she's, uh, she's on video live
from Montreal. And can you...
-
ES: Just if it's not clear I can't do
anything even so, I'm a bystander now. I'm
-
going to go to the stream and hopefully
Robert and Vanessa can help us for the Q&A
-
RT: Ed, do you want to do a Q&A right now
or do you want to. They've lost that. All
-
right, so, yeah. So Vanessa's in Montreal
and I've invited here her here today. And
-
so why don't we just start with a Q and A?
This is this is really it's Vanessa's
-
first year after a decade and a half of
being under very difficult circumstances.
-
Applause
Herald: Also, you know the drill. We have
-
microphones in the halls. Please line up
behind them. If you have question for a
-
Robert Tibbo or Vanessa and hopefully Mr.
Snowden will join us again, I think we're
-
working out the background. Do we have
questions from the Internet so far? Yes,
-
that is the case. So, Signal-Engel, please
give us a question.
-
Signal-Angel: Do you think that
whistleblowing could have prevented
-
fascist received regimes in the past and
that it will be more important in the near
-
future for the same reason?
RT: Questions for me, I'm assuming.
-
Whistleblowing has always occurred in the
past and it has brought about change.
-
Historically there, you know, there are
recorded cases, but the difficulties in
-
the past were the lack of protections.
Quite often in whistleblowers had to leave
-
the jurisdiction. They would end up being
killed. And and really, it's only in
-
recent history and in particular with with
Edward Snowden's whistleblowing, that
-
governments around the world, including
the European Union as a whole, recognize
-
that there needs to be change. There needs
to be more protections. But we're also
-
seeing that nations are providing enhanced
whistleblower protections. But on the
-
commercial civil side and they're still
lagging significantly, where there's
-
whistleblowing outing governments that
behave egregiously or criminally, as in
-
Mr. Snowden's case. So more than ever,
whistleblowing will remain and will
-
continue to be a crucial part of ensuring
government accountability and
-
transparency. But for whistleblowers to
step forward, a couple of things have to
-
happen. Society needs to be stepping up
and demanding government that there be
-
protections for whistleblowers,
particularly like Mr. Snowden. And
-
secondly, we've seen the government go
after with the Snowden refugees and made
-
their lives intolerable. There exists in
existence intolerable in Hong Kong and the
-
delay of so many years to get Vanessa and
Keana on the screen now into Canada and
-
the other families here in Hong Kong, who
are suffering right now, was the the
-
global leadership saying, don't protect a
whistleblower, because this is what's
-
gonna happen to you. So I hope that
Vanessa and Keana's arrivaled refuge in
-
Canada to safety and security, is an
example for the whole world that there
-
will be more whistleblowers. But there
also needs to be people in the general
-
population who say, look, we need to
support them and to take steps to make
-
whistle, make sure whistleblowers can
remain safe, but also when democratic
-
systems to put pressure on government, to
make changes and whistleblower
-
protections.
Signal-Angel: Thank you a lot for the
-
detailed answer. We have some more
questions. But before we continue with
-
them, I would like to ask all of you to
stay seated and stay quiet. Some people
-
are leaving already the hall. Please
don't. And please stay quiet so we can
-
enjoy the last minutes of this lovely Q
and A. You can also ask questions to
-
Vanessa, who played a crucial role in
sheltering Mr. Snowden back in Hong Kong.
-
And for now, I would like to hear a
question from microphone number three.
-
Mic 3: Hi. I'm [inaudible] Hi, I'm a Pakistani
journalist in exile. So thank you for the
-
talk. It's been super inspiring. My
question to Vanessa is that looking back
-
now that you everything that you suffer.
Would you say that if you were given a
-
choice, that you could do this all over
again and not do this at all? Would you?
-
Which one would you choose?
Vanessa: If I had the chance again [inaudible]
-
Applause
Herald: Can we have another question from
-
the Internet?
Signal-Angel: It's a question for Vanessa.
-
How are you settling down in Montreal and
has the community received you well?
-
Vanessa: inaudible
Herald: Thank you for this answer. Do we
-
have more questions in the hall? I sat at
a microphone and I can't see you right
-
now. Please wink if you do. I think that's
not the case. Signal-Angel. Do we have one
-
more question from you? Or wait?
Microphone number two, please go ahead.
-
Mic. 2: I don't know which one of you can
answer that, but what's causing the delay?
-
Why is the families still separated? Is
there any indication why Canada doesn't
-
process the search for asylum?
RT: *To an Angel: I want to put this on
-
last. OK?
RT: The Snowden refugee cases, it has been
-
a long delay and it's been too long. And
at this stage, the Canadian government is
-
is progressing with the cases and these
are complex cases. At this stage, that's
-
all I can really say. We all want the
other families supporting the DEKA, the
-
two children, Kiena's brother and sister.
And we want to treat this, the former
-
soldier, and we want them in Canada. We
want them in at the earliest time. And
-
this is really the only solution. It's the
right solution for the these extraordinary
-
people. Applaus
Mic 2: Thank You.
-
Applause
So apparently we have Edward Snowden
-
back.The connection is established again.
There is a question for him, then he's run
-
to a microphone because that's your only
chance. That's probably the last question
-
of this session. Microphone number four,
what's your question? Qualified?
-
Mic. 4: Yes, I think so. What an aura.
Thought. Thank you, everybody. My question
-
quick. So, Mr. Snowden, you said we should
put pressure and make change. And do you
-
think we should pressure our own
government locally or that we pressure our
-
government to pressure other governments?
So, for example, which sanctions through
-
these countries that Mr. Tibbo mentioned?
That's a quick.
-
ES: Yes. I think we need to look at where
can we be the most effective. This is a
-
difficult question, I think, for people
who are in advanced democracies. And
-
because you see all the terrible things
that are happening all over the world, you
-
see the situation in Russia, you see the
situation in China, you see the Russia
-
situation in Iran and North Korea. And of
course, where you can make a difference, I
-
think you always should act. Even in my
case, there have been things where I have
-
been criticizing, of course, the Russian
government, even though I live here, even
-
though it's dangerous to do. I don't think
there's much likelihood that the Russian
-
government is likely to listen to me. I
don't think there's much likelihood that
-
the Russian people will listen to me in
that circumstance, because I'm not
-
Russian. I don't speak the language. I
can't persuade them. But you can persuade
-
the people that you're around. You can
persuade the community. And that's really
-
when we talk about hacking, when we talk
about systems. Right. The whole thing that
-
they used against us was, that they
thought, we thought, you know, the system,
-
our democracy, our methods of voting, our
methods of policing the Internet, of
-
managing and sharing our communications
worked in a certain way. And how they were
-
actually being used, how they were
actually being implemented, how they were
-
actually being operated in many cases
against us. That was not clear in secrecy.
-
In many cases was responsible for this.
But when you talk about where you can make
-
the most difference, it's in this room.
It's the friendships you make that you
-
take with you. It's the networks of
solidarity and influence that you build,
-
the sharing of skill sets and cooperation
that will allow you to influence people
-
even outside your areas of expertise,
going to politics, going to local
-
officials, using the local officials to
get the state officials, using the state
-
officials to get to national, using the
national to get to the international. What
-
we have to do is we have to take a hard
look at how the world actually operates
-
today. Not how we wanted to operate, not
how we think it operates, but to measure
-
it, to see how it's actually function and
to see where the money goes, to see who's
-
using it, to see where the influence is.
And in many cases, to seize control of
-
that via whatever means that we have
available to us. This is where we get the
-
technical systems that, the people in this
room have an extraordinary amount of
-
influence over that. We may not have in
the political realm. If you make a phone
-
call and that gets used around the world,
you can provide the same guarantees, the
-
same protection to someone in China, to
someone in Russia that they have in
-
Germany, because technology can be
agnostic to its use. And if we make these
-
carve outs, if we make these sort of
emissions, if we make concessions to
-
power, to system, to government, to
institutions, we have to think about how
-
they will be used. The more rules in the
system, the more lines of complexity there
-
are, the greater the unseen attack surface
that can be used against us. We need to
-
design for tomorrow. But there is no time
to wait. We need to be working today.
-
Applause.
And if I could just say one thing. Thank
-
you, everyone, for your patience and for
bearing with us through all of this. I'm
-
gonna shut up and give this back to
Robert, but everybody asks, you know, how
-
can I make a difference? This is all very
good. It's very abstract. Again, be
-
opportunistic. Look at where you can make
a difference right now. In the case of
-
these families, we are almost across the
finish line. We had been in this fight for
-
years and we are about to win. We can do
it with your help. So please, if you can
-
support them, do. Thank you.
Applause
-
Herald: I have to extend a huge thanks to
you, Mr. Robert, to go to you. Edward
-
Snowden, thank you for coming on our
stream and thank you, Vanessa, for coming
-
to us as well. This is, this was a lovely
event and Mr. Snowden asked you to help.
-
And this is how, this is how, Robert, if
you like to say some last words?
-
RT: I would. This has been a long fight.
It's we're in the eighth year now, and
-
there's no way that we're gonna get to the
finish line unless donations are made.
-
Whatever you can help with, if it's if
it's a small amount of change, that's
-
fine. If you can donate something more
significantly. Of course, that's going to
-
help. But it's all about food, rent,
utilities, and also for Vanessa and Keana
-
and Montreal. We, the NGO, is under a
legal obligation to continue to support
-
them financially for the first full year,
that they're there in Montreal and they do
-
need that support. The one thing all
stresses the climate has been a big shock
-
for Vanessa and Keana, and it costs a lot
of money to get winter jackets or, you
-
know, jackets for autumn shoes, boots. So
it's been at times it's been rough for
-
them. But one solution is the donations
that make sure they have warm clothes and
-
food, etc.. And of course, the clients in
Hong Kong that they have almost no
-
government humanitarian support. So if you
can donate. We continue to donate. We all
-
appreciate this. And thank you so much.
-
Applause
-
36c3 postroll music
-
Subtitles created by c3subtitles.de
in the year 2020. Join, and help us!