Schlagwort: Amnesty International

• Non-white neighbourhoods in the Bronx, Brooklyn and Queens live with more CCTV surveillance

• New interactive website details exposure to invasive technology

New Yorkers living in areas at greater risk of stop-and-frisk by police are also more exposed to invasive facial recognition technology, new research by Amnesty International and partners has revealed.

New analysis as part of the global Ban The Scan campaign has proven how the New York Police Department’s vast surveillance operation particularly affects people already targeted for stop-and-frisk across all five boroughs of New York City. 

In the Bronx, Brooklyn and Queens, the research also showed that the higher the proportion of non-white residents, the higher the concentration of facial recognition compatible CCTV cameras.

Banning facial recognition for mass surveillance is a much-needed first step towards dismantling racist policing

Matt Mahmoudi, Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights Researcher

“Our analysis shows that the NYPD’s use of facial recognition technology helps to reinforce discriminatory policing against minority communities in New York City,” said Matt Mahmoudi, Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights Researcher at Amnesty International.

“We have long known that stop-and-frisk in New York is a racist policing tactic. We now know that the communities most targeted with stop-and-frisk are also at greater risk of discriminatory policing through invasive surveillance.

“The shocking reach of facial recognition technology in the city leaves entire neighbourhoods exposed to mass surveillance. The NYPD must now disclose exactly how this invasive technology is used. 

“Banning facial recognition for mass surveillance is a much-needed first step towards dismantling racist policing, and the New York City Council must now immediately move towards a comprehensive ban.”

The findings are based on crowdsourced data obtained by thousands of digital volunteers as part of the Decode Surveillance NYC project, who mapped more than 25,500 CCTV cameras across New York City. Amnesty International worked with data scientists to compare this data with statistics on stop-and-frisk and demographic data.   

Facial recognition technologies (FRT) for identification are systems of mass surveillance that violate the right to privacy, and threaten the rights to freedom of assembly, equality and non-discrimination. 

The NYPD used FRT in at least 22,000 cases between 2016 and 2019. Data on incidents of stop-and-frisk by the NYPD since 2002 shows Black and Latinx communities have been the overwhelming target of such tactics.   

Last year, Amnesty International sued the NYPD after it refused to disclose public records regarding its acquisition of FRT and other surveillance tools. The case is ongoing.

New interactive website detailing FRT exposure

Amnesty International is today also launching a new website that allows users to discover how much of any potential walking route between two locations in New York City might be exposed to FRT surveillance. 

During the Black Lives Matter movement of mid-2020, New Yorkers attending protests experienced higher levels of exposure to FRT. For example, a protester walking from the nearest subway station to Washington Square Park would be under surveillance by NYPD Argus cameras for the entirety of their route. 

“When we looked at routes that people would have walked to get to and from protests from nearby subway stations, we found nearly total surveillance coverage by publicly-owned CCTV cameras, mostly NYPD Argus cameras,” said Matt Mahmoudi.

“The pervasive use of facial recognition technology is effectively a digital stop-and-frisk. The use of mass surveillance technology at protest sites is being used to identify, track and harass people who are simply exercising their human rights. 

“This is a deliberate scare tactic by the NYPD that has no place in a free society, and must be stopped immediately.”

The website also allows users to track how much FRT is used between any of the major tourist attractions in the city by plotting the distance and possible route taken.

The pervasive use of facial recognition technology is effectively a digital stop-and-frisk

Matt Mahmoudi

Amnesty International encourages New Yorkers to take action by sending a letter of protest to their council member demanding the introduction of a bill that prohibits FRT to help protect their communities. Global users can sign Amnesty International’s petition calling for regulation of when and where public FRT systems are used.

Research partners that Amnesty International worked with include: Julien Cornebise of the Computer Science Department, University College London; BetaNYC, a civic organisation using data and technology to hold government to account; and Dr Damon Wischik, an independent data scientist.

The research marks the latest phase of the Ban The Scan campaign, following investigations into surveillance in New York and Hyderabad in India last year. Amnesty International is calling for a total ban on the use, development, production, sales, and export of FRT for mass surveillance purposes by both states and the private sector.

The post USA: Facial recognition technology reinforcing racist stop-and-frisk policing in New York – new research appeared first on Amnesty International.

Responding to the news that jailed political opposition leader Aleksei Navalny will face a new criminal trial in prison on 15 February for alleged embezzlement and contempt of court, Marie Struthers, Amnesty International’s Director for Eastern Europe and Central Asia, said:

“Evidently unsatisfied with the prison sentences already handed down to Aleksei Navalny, the Russian authorities are trying him again behind the barbed wire walls of a prison in what they have cynically described as an ‘open court hearing’. This sham trial, attended by prison guards rather than the media, breaks international human rights law and clearly deprives Navalny of his right to a fair trial.

“Aleksei Navalny was detained under politically motivated charges and should never have been imprisoned in the first place. Now, as the new trial starts, it’s obvious that the Russian authorities intend to ensure that Navalny doesn’t leave prison any time soon. A closed-door trial without public access only makes one more suspicious about new human rights violations the Russian authorities are trying to hide. They must ensure Navalny’s right to a fair trial is upheld by making it accessible to the public and held in accordance with domestic and international law.”

Now, as the new trial starts, it’s obvious that the Russian authorities intend to ensure that Navalny doesn’t leave prison any time soon

Marie Struthers, Amnesty International’s Director for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

Background

Aleksei Navalny has been charged with alleged contempt of court and the embezzlement of more than $35,000, which prosecutors say he siphoned from donations to organizations he founded.

The hearing will take place within penal colony IK-2 in Pokrov, located about 100 km east of Moscow. The court did not explain why the trial would be held in prison and failed to explain how witnesses, journalists or Navalny’s defence team could attend the heavily restricted facility. 

Navalny is currently serving a two-and-a-half-year sentence on trumped-up, politically motivated charges, which the European Court of Human Rights has described as “arbitrary and manifestly unreasonable”. If convicted under the new charges, Navalny faces up to 15 years in prison.

The post Russia: Aleksei Navalny facing up to 15 years behind bars in new ‘sham’ prison trial appeared first on Amnesty International.

Despite urgent calls to ensure the equal distribution of Covid-19 vaccines in 2021, pharmaceutical companies tragically failed to rise to the challenge of a once-in-a-century global health and human rights crisis. Instead, they monopolized technology, blocked and lobbied against the sharing of intellectual property, charged high prices for vaccines and prioritized supplies to wealthy countries, said Amnesty International today in a new assessment of the leading Covid-19 vaccine developers.

Ten billion doses of Covid-19 vaccines were produced last year, more than enough to reach the 40% target of global vaccination set by the World Health Organization (WHO) for the end of 2021. Yet MMoney calls the shots: Pharma’s response to the Covid-19 vaccines crisis  – an update on Amnesty International’s September 2021 report  A double dose of inequality: Pharma companies and the Covid-19 vaccines crisis – reveals that just over 4% of those living in low-income countries had been fully vaccinated by the end of last year.

“More than 1.2 billion people in low and lower-middle income countries could have been vaccinated by the end of 2021 if high-income countries and vaccine makers took their human rights obligations and responsibilities to heart,” said Rajat Khosla, Amnesty International’s Senior Director of Research, Advocacy and Policy.

While high income countries hoarded vaccines, callously choking supply to poorer parts of the world, pharma companies played a pivotal role in this unfolding human rights catastrophe – leaving those most in need to cope on their own

Rajat Khosla, senior director of research, advocacy and policy

“While high income countries hoarded vaccines, callously choking supply to poorer parts of the world, pharma companies played a pivotal role in this unfolding human rights catastrophe – leaving those most in need to cope on their own. These companies could have been the heroes of 2021. Instead, they turned their back on those who needed vaccines the most and just continued with business as usual, putting profits before people. If we want 2022 to be the last year of this pandemic, we need to shift course now to reach the 70% WHO-target by July of this year.”

In 2021, Pfizer, BioNTech and Moderna projected revenues of up to US$54 billion, yet supplied less than 2% of their vaccines to low-income countries. Chinese companies Sinovac and Sinopharm delivered just 0.4% and 1.5% respectively of their vaccines to low-income countries.

Johnson & Johnson’s and AstraZeneca’s records on distribution were better – with 50% of their stock reaching low and lower-middle-income countries (with many of these doses provided as “donations” from upper-income countries, not as part of sales agreements). However, both companies still refuse to share their technology and intellectual property through World Health Organization-coordinated initiatives and are now abandoning their not-for-profit pricing model.

“Despite billions in public funding, these companies are continuing to put their own greed before their human rights responsibilities. It’s deeply concerning that profits are being prioritised over people – even in the face of more than 5.6 million people dead from Covid-19 to date. How many more variants do we have to live through before high-income countries and pharmaceutical companies realize that those in low-income countries must have access to vaccines – not just those living in rich ones?” said Rajat Khosla.

Further findings provided by Airfinity, a science and analytics company, up to 31 December 2021, include:

• AstraZeneca produced just under 2.4 billion vaccine doses in 2021 and supplied 1.7% of these to low-income countries and 70% to lower-middle income countries, an increase on the previous assessment.

• Johnson & Johnson produced just over 300 million doses in 2021 and delivered 20% of these to low-income countries and 31% to lower-middle income countries, a significant increase on the previous assessment.

• Moderna produced 673 million doses in 2021 and delivered 2% of these to low-income countries and 23.5% to lower-middle income countries, a significant increase on the previous assessment, but still short of what is required.

• Pfizer/BioNTech produced 2.4 billion doses in 2021 and delivered 1% of these to low-income countries and 14% to lower-middle income countries, a slight increase on the previous assessment, but well below Amnesty International’s 50% target.

• Sinopharm produced just over 2.2 billion doses in 2021, most of which were supplied domestically within China. The company delivered 1.5% of its doses to low-income countries and 24% to lower-middle income countries, short of what is required for a fair distribution of its vaccines.

• Sinovac produced over 2.4 billion doses in 2021, most of which were supplied domestically within China. It delivered 0.4% of its doses to low-income countries and 20.5% to lower-middle income countries.

Amnesty’s report also shows how these companies don’t share their intellectual property, knowledge and technology, putting in place obstacles to fair vaccine access, as well as actively lobbying against the relaxation of intellectual property rights.

“The fight for equitable vaccines is far from over,” said Rajat Khosla. “We will continue to call on pharmaceutical companies to prioritise delivery to low-income countries in order to meet the WHO’s target of 70% global vaccination before mid-2022. Everyone deserves a fair shot at a vaccine and as we enter our third year of the pandemic, it’s time that indeed everyone, living anywhere in this world, has immediate access.”

Amnesty International is also calling on companies to share intellectual property by issuing open and non-exclusive licences or participating in the Covid-19 Technology Access Pool (C-TAP), established to support the sharing of open and non-exclusive licences, publicly disclose all terms and conditions, and price vaccine doses so profit does not stand in the way of access to Covid-19 vaccines.

“Investors have also played a huge role in this global crisis. Their lack of meaningful action shows that while Covid-19 unleashed unimaginable suffering on millions around the world, they thrived, but did nothing to ensure their investments did not result in human rights harm on account of the profit-driven approach taken by pharmaceutical companies,” said Rajat Khosla. “We’re calling on investors to face up to their actions immediately and use their considerable leverage to pressure pharmaceutical companies to lift obstacles to fair access to vaccines, as well as promote accountability and transparency.”

Notes to editors:

To coincide with last year’s report, A double dose of inequality: Pharma companies and the Covid-19 vaccines crisis, Amnesty International launched the “100 Day Countdown: 2 Billion Vaccines now!” urging vaccine developers to deliver at least 50% of vaccines produced by the end of the year to low- and lower-middle income countries. The campaign also called for states hoarding vaccines to redistribute surplus doses to countries that needed them the most.

The post Covid-19: Pharmaceutical companies’ failure on equal vaccine access contributed human rights catastrophe in 2021 appeared first on Amnesty International.

The lifting of ban on four newspapers that had been barred from publishing since 2016 and 2017 for exposing alleged corruption and human rights violations is a positive step, but the Tanzanian authorities must do more to guarantee media freedom going forward, Amnesty International said today.

The four newspapers, Daima, Mawio, Mwanahalisi and Mseto, were banned from publishing for various offences under the restrictive Media Services Act, which came into force in November 2016, and the now repealed Newspaper Act.

Over the past six years, numerous newspapers have been targeted and shut down for exposing cases of corruption and human rights violations in Tanzania

Sarah Jackson, Deputy Director for East Africa, the Horn and the Great Lakes

“Over the past six years, being a journalist or running a media organization in Tanzania has come with a price. Numerous newspapers have been targeted and shut down for exposing cases of corruption and human rights violations,” said Sarah Jackson, Amnesty International’s Deputy Director for East Africa, the Horn and the Great Lakes.

“Now that the ban on these newspapers has been lifted, the Tanzanian authorities must immediately repeal the Media Services Act to ensure that independent media outlets can operate freely, and carry out their work without fear of reprisals. This is essential for the enjoyment of the rights to freedom of expression and access to information.”

The Tanzanian authorities have used the Media Services Act and the Newspaper Act to shut down, fine or suspend independent and critical media outlets for publishing or broadcasting allegations of corruption and human rights violations or reporting on general issues of governance.

On 10 August 2016, the state banned Mseto from publishing a week after it published an article implicating an assistant state minister in a corruption scandal. In 2017, Harrison Mwakyembe, the then Minister of Information, Culture and Sports banned four newspapers — Mawio, Mwanahalisi, Raia Mwema, and Tanzania Daima — for publishing stories on allegations of corruption.

While the government has reinstated Tanzania Daima’s licence at various times since it was first banned, Mseto, Mwanahalisi and Mawio have all been prohibited from publishing since their initial ban in 2016 and 2017.

On 23 June 2020, the Director of Information Services indefinitely banned the printing and distribution of Tanzania Daima both inside and outside the country. The order accused the newspaper of breaching the law and failing to uphold professional ethics, but did not cite specific laws or content. The newspaper was previously banned for 90 days in 2017 on allegations of publishing false information.

On 11 August 2021, the authorities suspended another newspaper, Uhuru, for fourteen days. They said it had published a false report claiming the president has no intention of running for office in the 2025 election.

Now that the ban on these newspapers has been lifted, the Tanzanian authorities must immediately repeal the Media Services Act to ensure that independent media outlets can operate freely, and carry out their work without fear of reprisals

Sarah Jackson

On 5 September 2021, the Information Services Department suspended Raia Mwema for 30 days on allegations it repeatedly violated professional journalistic standards and broke the law by publishing “misleading” reports that amounted to “incitement of violence.”

Background

Nape Nnauye, Tanzania’s Minister for Information, Communications and Information Technology, announced the lifting of the ban on the four newspapers on 10 February 2022 at a meeting with newspaper editors in Dar es Salaam.

On 6 April 2021, President Samia Suluhu Hassan instructed the authorities to allow media outlets banned under her predecessor ’s administration, John Magufuli, to resume operations.

The post Tanzania: Victory for media freedom as ban on four newspapers lifted appeared first on Amnesty International.