THE INTERNET AND THE GLOBAL GOVERNANCE CONUNDRUM

The resolute quest of the world governing body – The United Nations to take on the global administration of the internet, using its instrument – the International Telecoms Union, has been a subject of disagreement between the UN, and the United States who currently has a major control over all global internet administration authorities. The body that manages the global domain Name System (DNS) – the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), currently operates under the direct control and authority of the United States Government. However the calls for the United States to de-colonise her control over the internet, has been taken with fears by the US that doing so would put the control of ICANN in the hands of the UN.

In this Publication by the Information Policy Blog, a publication by the giant anti-governance internet advocacy group – Electronic Frontier Foundation, the question was posed whether it would the US would indeed hand over ICANN at all. Kindly read and have your say.

“The Future of Internet Governance: Should the U.S. Relinquish Its Authority Over ICANN?

Currently, the U.S. government retains limited authority over the Internet’s domain name system, primarily through the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions contract between the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). By virtue of the IANA functions contract, the NTIA exerts a legacy authority and stewardship over ICANN, and arguably has more influence over ICANN and the domain name system (DNS) than other national governments.

On March 14, 2014, NTIA announced the intention to transition its stewardship role and procedural authority over key Internet domain name functions to the global Internet multistakeholder community. To accomplish this transition, NTIA has asked ICANN to convene interested global Internet stakeholders to develop a transition proposal. NTIA has stated that it will not accept any transition proposal that would replace the NTIA role with a government-led or an intergovernmental organization solution.

Currently, Internet stakeholders are engaged in a series of working groups to develop a transition proposal. Their goal is to submit a final proposal to NTIA by summer 2015. NTIA must approve the proposal in order for it to relinquish its authority over the IANA functions contract. While the IANA functions contract expires on September 30, 2015, NTIA has the flexibility to extend the contract for any period through September 2019.

Concerns have risen in Congress over the proposed transition. Critics worry that relinquishing U.S. authority over Internet domain names may offer opportunities for either hostile foreign governments or intergovernmental organizations, such as the United Nations, to gain undue influence over the Internet. On the other hand, supporters argue that this transition completes the necessary evolution of Internet domain name governance towards the private sector, and will ultimately support and strengthen the multistakeholder model of Internet governance.”

NIGERIA AND POOR TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICE DELIVERY: WHA:T SHOULD WE DO WITH THESE NETWORK SERVICES PROVIDERS?

I have been wondering whether I am
the only Nigerian who is going frenzy
crazy over the acutely poor network
service delivery by the gsm
companies, especially MTN. I think I
am losing my mind over this issue. I
have complained on national
television, nagged on radio air
waves, chirped on twitter and what
more….I had just made sure my voice
was heard on any and every platform
that cared to publicise my voice, that
something more needs to be done
besides the lame fines levied by the
NCC.
The practice seem to be now that
once there is a violation of standard
in network service delivery, the
regulator’s first cause of action is to
levy fines, with little concern for us-
the victims of such deliberately
contrived wickedness called service
failure. little wonder the service
providers can continue with impunity
to disregard quality, because the
regualators have, by their
unconscionable thirst for cheap fines,
tacitly uncensored the criminal rip off
of the Nigerian telecoms consumer
public. This must stop forthwith!!!
Now I can no longer talk, nor can i
stay quiet. I am caught in the middle
between deliberate muteness and
stilty inaction. My grace for inaction
Will soon be drained. I will sue them,
I swear, I shall sue them! This is
nothing but the musings of a
frustrated customer. Are there people
as frustrated as I am out there?
please let’s talk.
Is there any need for fines when
those fines do not trickle down to
those who have been wronged by
service failures? shouldn’t we just
sue for compensation and forget
about fines? Let’s talk!

NCC’S REGULATORY FRAMEWORK FOR THE LAWFUL INTERCEPTION OF COMMUNICATIONS: DETERMINING THE BALANCE BETWEEN NATIONAL INTEREST AND PRIVACY RIGHTS

The controversy surrounding the Proposed Regulatory Framework for the Lawful Interception of Telecommunications Communications of the Nigerian Telecommunications Commission (NCC), has been a growing and strongly contended issue between law enforcement and regulatory agencies and the citizenry on the one hand; and the telecoms solutions providers and users/subscribers on the other.

 

The issue relating to the practice of communications interception has long been one of a global nature, even before the advent of the Information and Communications Technology age. Therefore, countries across the world have devised their own system of communications and data security management technology, in line with global best practice. With the growing trend of global insecurity, crime and terrorism, the need to have a system of security management and control, cannot be over emphasized. Therefore, the drive of the Nigerian Telecommunications Commissions, in collaboration with the National Security Adviser (NSA), the State Security Service (SSS) and other security outfits in the country, to fashion a regulatory framework for the control, management and interception of communications and data is a laudable one.

 

However, whilst it is not the object of this review to pitch tents with any of the camps over the viability or fallibility of the this policy intent of the NCC, the basic question to be asked is whether in its true intent to implement this policy, adequate facilities and protective policies have equally been put in place by NCC to ensure a balance between national security and data privacy?

 

The controversy over the policy covers such questions; would the policy not infringe on the privacy rights of citizens as enshrined in the 1999 Constitution? Do we have a viable data protection regime in this country to ensure the balance between national security and privacy protection? What checks have been put in place to prevent the abusive and ultra vires use of interception tools and intercepted data by the regulatory authorities? What guaranties are there to ensure that people in power would not put the regulations to negative personal use, against perceived political opponents? These and more, are the many issues raised so far over the policy.

 

The law empowering the NCC in this regard is the Nigerian Communications Act, Cap N97 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria. Section 70 (1)(e) of Act empowers the NCC to make and publish regulations on communications and related offences and penalties thereto. In like manner, Part four of the said Act imposes duties on telecoms providers and users on National security matters.

 

A brief glimpse on the law and practice of data interception in other advance countries, particularly the EU and the United States, even in India, will show that ,all the countries have established very well ordered Data protection regimes, thus, establishing a platform upon which their communications interception regulations and practice could take off. Unfortunately, Nigeria is yet to enact a data protection law, nor has there been a case law determination of the rights of owners of information to the protection of such information. This is a gross breach of international best practices and global standards in information security and management.

 

It is to be suggested thus that to be successful, the procedure for the implementation of the regulation should be such as is rooted in a lawful and equitable process. This processes may involve a proper court-based application for an order authorizing any intended interception sought to be carried out, or a warrant issued by the court, before such order is issued, strong proof of threat to national security is to be tendered (as the only reason for violating the privacy rights of a citizen, should be an overriding national interest) or that a serious crime needs to be investigated etc.

 

Conclusively, the policy is a laudable one, however, for it to be viable, it is needful to first ensure that the ground is well cultivated to make for a good propagation of its yield; otherwise, the country would continue to wallow in the vicious circle of continued formulation and reformulation of failed government policies without any meaningful positive development.

The State of Data Protection Law in Nigeria

It is bewildering how well Nigeria is used to the collection of data from the subjects of data collation, but how little concerned Nigerians are of the use to which their data is put. More disturbing, is the inability of these data collectors to properly administer the data collected.

It is like the collection of data from members of the public has suddenly become a trendy pastime for government agencies and large corporations in the country. The CBN in 2011 directed the banks to commence anew, the collection of personal data of bank customers, the NCC did same with the telecoms industry, INEC has renewed the election register so many times that we have lost count. All these, added to the other many agencies of government doing the same thing.

The question that bothers more is how well this information is managed and how well it is protected in order to better protect the owners of the data. It is one thing to collect data, yet another to put this data to use in a manner that violates the personal rights of the owners of these data.

Nigeria currently has no Data Protection laws in place, though, there have been bills in the National Assembly. These bills have been lying fallow in the houses, while the houses engage in frivolous and distracting exercises. This to a great extent, goes to explain the displacement of national priority and the corruption that has eaten very deep into the national system.

Now, in spite of the absence of a legislative instrument for the protection of data in the country, can it be said that all hope is lost? Not at all. While there has no such law that properly delineates the parameters for the use and management of collected data, it is believed nevertheless, that the Nigerian courts may still have the powers to adjudicate on the basis of the time tested principles of common law and the fundamental protected rights enshrined under the Nigerian Constitution of 1999 as amended.

Conclusively, it must be stated that every person has a right to know and determine how his or her information in the data system of any organization or institution is used. He or she has the mandate to authorize or prohibit such us. Therefore it is very unlawful for corporations and businesses (as it is the trend) to sell the information of its subscribers or customers to other agencies for commercial exploitation.

When we receive advert text messages or emails from advertising agencies and businesses, does it not bother us to know how they got our contacts, both phone and email? I sure fear for our privacy! We need to open our perceptive senses people.

Apple versus Samsung: Between Protection for Intellectual Property and Consumer Protection

Apple’s recent patent victory over Samsung has called for a lot of speculations over the development of the creative industry, especially in the science and technology ventures. There are a lot more people who oppose the verdict against Samsung than there are supporters for it. A pressing question thus becomes, would the implication of the judgment be good of bad for the market? what effect would it have on consumer protection and the market preservation?

No doubt, the courts would still be called upon to adjudicate on these issues in the coming years. However what would your views be? Let’s discuss people….. in any case we cannot but sit tight and watch how the drama plays out, as Samsung has started moving to appeal against the decision. There is a possibility Google may have to be joined in the battle, as its Android technology is likely to suffer the same faith as the Samsung Galaxy app.

Are we therefore, as consumers, threatened by the possibility of price manipulation and disregard for consumer rights as a result of this decision?