By Emilio Godoy
MEXICO CITY, Jul 18 2012 (IPS)

Mexican advocates of internet freedom are mobilising to protest their government’s decision to sign the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), a multilateral treaty whose stated aim is to protect intellectual property right through enhanced international cooperation and enforcement.

These activists will pressure president-elect Enrique Peña, who is scheduled to take office on Dec. 1, and the new senate due to be inaugurated on Sep. 1, to reject ratification of the treaty, which, they say, has provisions that threaten user privacy, freedom of expression, and universal internet access.

On Wednesday, Jul. 11, the outgoing conservative government of Felipe Calderón announced unexpectedly that the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property had signed the ACTA.

Negotiations for the treaty began in 2006 and signatories so far include Australia, Canada, the European Union, Japan, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, South Korea, Switzerland and the United States.

“We’re going to demand that the senate vote against ratifying (ACTA) as it is an attempt to control the internet,” Irene Levy, president of Mexican Telecommunications Observatory, a non-governmental organisation (NGO), told IPS.

“And we’re also going to insist that the input of artistes and authors be heard in  drafting a national initiative to reform intellectual property laws to protect their legitimate rights,” she added.

ACTA has also met with strong resistance outside Mexico. On Jul. 4, the European Parliament rejected it on the grounds that it violated fundamental rights. An overwhelming 478 legislators rejected it while 39 were in favour, and 165 abstained.

The treaty seeks to establish an international legal framework for targeting counterfeit goods, generic drugs and copyright infringement online. If it comes into force it would create a new intergovernmental body parallel to the World Trade Organisation, the World Intellectual Property Organisation and the United Nations.

The scope of ACTA covers intellectual property, copyright, trademarks, geographical indications or denominations of origin, industrial designs, patents, layout-designs of integrated circuits, protection of undisclosed information and trade secrets.

The treaty includes surveillance measures to control the movement of information across borders, and imposes obligations on internet service providers to filter and censor data shared over the internet.

“We need to resume the debate on this issue, focusing on an agenda that includes all the stakeholders involved, to create a legal framework that protects everyone and not just the industries that hold a cultural monopoly,” Antonio Martínez, head of communications of the Mexican chapter of Artículo 19, an NGO that promotes freedom of expression, told IPS.

The Mexican government ignored the input from the discussions of the Plural Working Group for Monitoring ACTA Negotiations, which engaged senators, business representatives, academics and civil society organisations.

Mexico’s senate had already rejected the treaty in June 2011 because it violated national laws and contravened regulations in force. It could also affect internet access, thus widening the digital divide, and be used to censure online content.

Earlier, in November 2010, the Federal Telecommunications Commission had warned that ACTA could hold back internet growth, threaten user privacy and slow down progress on the digital agenda.

By now signing on ACTA, Calderón is forcing the newly-elected executive and legislative branches to resume debate on the relevance of the treaty.

According to the Mexican Internet Association, there are more than 30 million internet users in this Latin American country of 112 million people.

Representatives of the music, film and software industries have been calling for Mexico to toughen regulations to protect their products.

The Business Software Alliance estimates that software piracy is a business worth some 1.25 billion dollars.

In the fourth survey of Pirated and Counterfeit Goods Consumption, published in 2011 by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in Mexico (American Chamber/Mexico), eight out of every 10 respondents admitted to buying counterfeit goods.

Piracy and sale of counterfeit products are already considered offences under the criminal code, as is unauthorised access to computer systems and equipment.

The industry’s views have permeated forums such as the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), which is debating future political and technical standards for the internet.

Even if ACTA is not ultimately ratified in Mexico, its content could filter into other conventions and treaties under consideration such as the Trans Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership Agreement (TPP), signed in 2005 by Chile, Singapore, Brunei and New Zealand. Current negotiations for an expanded version include Australia, Canada, Malaysia, Mexico, Peru, the U.S. and Vietnam.

“There’s no doubt in my mind that the U.S. will try to implement this any way it can, dressing it up in other mechanisms, whether the TPP or the ITU. So we can’t fall for the false argument that it’s only about copyright protection, when it’s an issue that affects the freedom of the internet,” Levy said.

The tenth round of negotiations of the TPP were held Jul. 2-10 in the U.S. city of San Diego.

On intellectual property, the TPP proposes legal incentives for internet service providers who hinder the storage or free sharing of protected content, and who identify users of copyright-infringing websites. It would also grant economic compensation for complainants affected by such practices.

In addition, it provides for the establishment of sanctions for commercial and non-commercial infringement of intellectual rights, the creation of a legal surveillance scheme and the introduction of patent rules to protect surgical procedures or medicines derived from biological processes, such as vaccines.

“These same sectors operate in different fronts with the same intention of controlling the distribution of tangible and intangible goods, which should be treated separately,” Martínez said.

After a week of tense negotiations, a United Nations preparatory committee concluded a final round of talks on Friday to define the rules of procedure for a global Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), which is expected to be finalised in July this year.

The iconic statue of a knotted gun barrel outside U.N. headquarters was created by Swedish artist Fredrik Reuterswärd and is titled "Non-Violence". Credit: Tressia Boukhors/IPS

The ratification of the report by committee chair Ambassador Roberto Moritan of Argentina closed the last of four prepcoms held since 2010 to lay the groundwork for the ATT negotiations.

The report includes a “non-paper” by Moritan that will be the basis of this summer’s talks.

Human rights groups expressed cautious optimism about the outcome.

“This document fits 70 percent of our recommendations,” Aymeric Elluin of Amnesty International told IPS.

But the agreement on a vote by consensus, meaning that every state has veto power, may deeply compromise the adoption of a comprehensive treaty, he warned.

“There is a real risk for the final text of ATT not to be adopted in July,” he added. “Negotiations on the content will be extremely difficult.”

Need for a legally binding instrument

The current crackdown on protesters in Syria and other countries in the Middle East and North Africa has underlined the absence of any global regulation on the conventional arms trade, allowing arms to end up in the hands of human rights abusers, according to human rights groups.

“The ATT concerns the biggest treaty negotiation in the field of control arms, excepting the nuclear weapon,” Brian Wood, Amnesty International’s manager for arms control, told IPS. “It is all about saving lives and human rights.”

According to the United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs, “The global trade in conventional weapons – from warships and battle tanks to fighter jets and machine guns – remains poorly regulated. No set of internationally agreed standards exist to ensure that arms are only transferred for appropriate use.”

“Many governments have voiced concern about the absence of globally agreed rules for all States to guide their decisions on arms transfers. That is why they have started negotiating an Arms Trade Treaty.”

Nearly every country in the world has some degree of involvement in the arms trade, as an importer or exporter, or in permitting arms shipments to transit through their territorial waters.

The United States is by far the biggest weapons manufacturer, followed by Russia, the “Big Three” in Europe – Germany, France, Britain – and China.

India, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are all leading importers – but so are some of the major producers, such as the United States.

Concerned about the unchecked proliferation of weapons, in 2009, the U.N. General Assembly decided to convene a Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty in 2012 “to elaborate a legally binding instrument on the highest possible common international standards for the transfer of conventional arms”.

Political chess game

“As we have seen in the case of Syria, veto power leads to inaction and hampers the ability of the international community to prevent conflict,” said Jeff Abramson, coordinator of the Control Arms Coalition, referring to the recent paralysis in the U.N. Security Council.

“The will of the majority here who wants to see the arms trade brought under control must not be thwarted by a minority set on delaying and confusing the process,” he stressed.

He added that countries that were the most supportive of veto power over the final draft document included Syria, Cuba, Iran and the United States.

“Lives and livelihoods continue to be destroyed by an arms trade that is out of control, and the majority of governments that want to see a truly ‘bulletproof’ treaty must not be blocked by a small minority with vested interests,” he said.

Russia, China and the United States are all pushing their own agendas and oppose the integration of human rights into the treaty.

The U.S. opposes the inclusion of munitions, China wants to exclude small arms, and Russia wants a treaty regulating the illicit arms trade only.

“It is also deplorable that Russia argues it is responsible to continue sending weapons to a regime (Syria) that is bombarding its citizens,” said Abramson.

“A strong ATT with robust human rights criteria would make clear that arms transfers must not occur when there is a substantial risk of them being used to kill civilians and commit human rights abuses,” he said. “The sale of any arms to Syria right now is simply appalling.”

Mounting call for human rights protections

Civil society groups are urging strong rules that protect human rights and bar arms from being sent to those who likely to use them against civilian populations.

“It is about regulation and prevention based on risk assessment,” Wood told IPS.

“All types of arms should be included,” he said, including small arms and munitions.

On Feb 14, a group of Nobel Peace Laureates also called for the broadest possible criteria, scope and implementation mechanisms for an effective Arms Trade Treaty.

At a press conference held at United Nations headquarters, the former president of Costa Rica, Oscar Arias Sanchez, said, “The challenge before us is not just to get a document signed. The challenge before us is to do justice to victims of violence. The challenge before us is to ensure that our goal becomes reality. These men and women and children deserve nothing less than swift and effective action.”