Latest update November 25th, 2024 1:00 AM
Latest News
- ExxonMobil commences design for 7th project as Gov’t remains ‘iffy’ over approval
- Gov’t extends deadline for proposals on second phase of Gas-to-Energy project
- Hezbollah rockets land near Tel Aviv after big Israeli strike on Beirut
- 121 drivers nabbed speeding, 248 with unauthorised tinted glass
- Cop stabbed by Venezuelan national
More calls for controversial Cybercrime Bill to be withdrawn
…No fear of sedition if Govt. governs fairly and justly – says WPA Group
Two more established groups have openly opposed the sedition clause in the Cyber Crime Bill which has stirred public debate in the past week.
The Working Peoples Alliance (WPA) Overseas Associates and the Guyana Human Rights Association (GHRA) are opposed to Article 18 of the 2016 Bill.
The WPA is part of the coalition Government. According to the political entity, the sedition clause appears geared towards repression.
“If a government governs fairly and justly they should have no fear of sedition,” the WPA group stated.
The WPA affiliates pointed out that Guyana has had bad experiences at the hands of authoritarian regimes attempting to suppress political dissent and must condemn any act under any guise that would take away freedom of expression.
Section 18 of the Cybercrime Bill (2016)
“No legislation should be employed to deprive citizens of their constitutional rights of freedom of conscience, action, expression and the absolute right of legitimate dissent and the right to remove a government not lawfully elected or a government lawfully elected that destroys the foundation of our democracy. The right to agitate for the removal of such governments should not be abridged,” the WPA group noted.
The GHRA labeled the Bill as profoundly undemocratic.
“Its fundamental premise, is perverse, namely that social peace will be secured by protecting the reputation of elected officials from public scrutiny by criminalizing opinion, destroying principles of plurality, freedom of expression and the human right to access the internet. The GHRA believes this Bill should be withdrawn in its entirety,” the GHRA stated.
Clause 18, according to the GHRA, is only one of many obnoxious features of the Bill.
The GHRA pointed out that the sweeping negative character of the Bill is sustained throughout, pointing to Clause 30 which states that a person who has knowledge about the functioning of a computer system or computer data storage medium, or security measures applied to protect computer data, that is the subject of a search warrant shall, if requested by the police officer authorised to undertake the search, assist the police officer to access the computer.
“It seems not to have occurred either to Government or Opposition parliamentarian involved in the Special Committee that reviewed this Bill that ‘exciting disaffection’ and ‘contempt’ has been a central feature of Guyanese politics thanks in no small part to the contributions made by both major political parties. Were this Bill passed into law any form of ‘disaffection’ expressed by militants in their ranks in a tweet, a post, or other form of public social media statement, could trigger application of the above penalties to themselves and their party leaders,” the GHRA warned.
Similar Articles
THE BLUNT OF THE DAY
Sports
Features/Columnists
The business class also funds undemocratic parties
…Peeping Tom Kaieteur News- There’s a peculiar phenomenon in Guyana, a sort of cyclical ritual, where members of... more
Rising Gun Crimes in the Caribbean: Urgent Action required by all
By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News – There is an alarming surge in gun-related violence, particularly among younger... more
Weekend Cartoon
