Activities of Jasenko SELIMOVIC related to 2018/0331(COD)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on preventing the dissemination of terrorist content online
Amendments (32)
Amendment 116 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) This Regulation contributes to the protection of public security while establishing appropriate and robust safeguards to ensure protection of the fundamental rights at stake. This includes the rights to respect for private life and to the protection of personal data, the right to effective judicial protection, the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to receive and impart information, the freedom to conduct a business, and the principle of non-discrimination. Competent authorities and hosting service providers should only adopt measures which are necessary, appropriate and proportionate within a democratic society, taking into account the particular importance accorded to the freedom of expression and information, as well as the freedom of the press and pluralism of the media, which constitutes one of the essential foundations of a pluralist, democratic society, and is one of the values on which the Union is founded. Measures constituting interference in the freedom of expression and information should be strictly targeted, in the sense that they must serve to prevent the dissemination of terrorist content, but without thereby affecting the right to lawfully receive and impart information, taking into account the central role of hosting service providers in facilitating public debate and the distribution and receipt of facts, opinions and ideas in accordance with the law.
Amendment 119 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7 a) This Regulation should not have the effect of modifying the obligation for Member States to respect fundamental rights and fundamental legal principles as enshrined in Article 6 of the Treaty on the European Union. Those fundamental rights include the freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authorities. Any restrictions to the exercise of these fundamental rights within the framework of this Regulation should be prescribed by law and should be necessary in a democratic society, with the aim of fulfilling the aims of this Regulation.
Amendment 120 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 b (new)
Recital 7 b (new)
(7 b) This Regulation should respect the fundamental rights and observe the principles recognised in the European Convention on Human Rights and in the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights. In particular, in its judgment of 24 November 2011 the European Court of Human Rights concluded that European Union law, and in particular Directive 2000/31/EC1a and the applicable fundamental rights, precluded an injunction imposed on an Internet service provider to introduce a system for filtering all electronic communications passing via its services, applied indiscriminately to all its customers, as a preventive measure, exclusively at its expense and for an unlimited period. _________________ 1a Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market ('Directive on electronic commerce')
Amendment 123 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) The right to an effective remedy is enshrined in Article 19 TEU and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Each natural or legal person has the right to an effective judicial remedy before the competent national court against any of the measures taken pursuant to this Regulation, which can adversely affect the rights of that person. The right includes, in particular the possibility for hosting service providers and content providers to effectively contest the removal orders before the court of the Member State whose authorities issued the removal order. That right can be invoked before the court of the Member State where the hosting service provider has its main establishment or where the legal representative designated by the hosting provider pursuant to Article 16 resides or is established.
Amendment 124 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) In order to provide clarity about the actions that both hosting service providers and competent authorities should take to prevent the dissemination of terrorist content online, this Regulation should establish a definition of terrorist content for preventative purposes drawing on the definition of terrorist offences under Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council9 . Given the need to address the most harmful terrorist propaganda online, the definition should capture material and information that incites, encourages or advocates the commission or contribution to terrorist offences, provides instructions for the commissi or promotes the participation in activities of a terrorist group. The definition includes content that provides guidance for the making and use of explosives, firearms or other weapons of such offer noxious or hazardous substances as well as CBRN substances, or promotes the participation in activities of a terrorist group. Such informationon other methods and techniques, including the selection of targets, for the purpose of committing terrorist offences. Such material includes in particular text, images, sound recordings and videos. When assessing whether content constitutes terrorist content within the meaning of this Regulation, competent authorities as well as hosting service providers should take into account factors such as the nature and wording of the statements, the context in which the statements were made and their potential to lead to harmful consequences, thereby affecting the security and safety of persons. The fact that the material was produced by, is attributable to or disseminated on behalf of an EU-listed terrorist organisation or person constitutes an important factor in the assessment. Content disseminated for educational, jcournalisticnter-narrative or research purposes should be adequately protected, striking a fair balance between fundamental rights including in particular the freedom of expression and information and public security needs. Where the disseminated material is published under the editorial responsibility of the content provider, any decision as to the removal of such content should take into account the journalistic standards established by press and/or media regulation consistent with the law of the Union and the right to freedom of expression and the right to freedom and pluralism of the media as enshrined in Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. Furthermore, the expression of radical, polemic or controversial views in the public debate on sensitive political questions should not be considered terrorist content. _________________ 9 Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2017 on combating terrorism and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA and amending Council Decision 2005/671/JHA (OJ L 88, 31.3.2017, p. 6).
Amendment 138 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) The procedure and obligations resulting from legal orders requesting hosting service providers to remove terrorist content or disable access to it, following an assessment by the competent authorities, should be harmonised. Member States should remain free as to the choice of the competent authorities allowing them to designate administrative, law enforcement or judicial authorities with that task. Given the speed at which terrorist content is disseminated across online services, this provision imposes obligations on hosting service providers to ensure that terrorist content identified in the removal order is removed or access to it is disabled within one hour from receiving the removal order. IWithout prejudice to the requirement to preserve data under Article 7 of this Regulation, or under the [draft e-evidence legislation], it is for the hosting service providers to decide whether to remove the content in question or disable access to the content for users in the Union. This should have the effect of preventing access or at least of making it difficult to achieve and of seriously discouraging internet users who are using their services from accessing the content to which access was disabled.
Amendment 144 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13 a (new)
Recital 13 a (new)
(13 a) The removal order should include a classification of the relevant content as terrorist content and contain sufficient information so as to locate the content, by providing a URL and any other additional information, such as a screenshot of the content in question. The competent authority should also provide a supplementary statement of reasons, as to why the content is considered terrorist content. The reasons provided need not contain sensitive information, which could jeopardise investigations. The statement of reasons should however allow the hosting service provider and, ultimately, the content provider to effectively exercise their right to judicial redress.
Amendment 151 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) Given the scale and speed necessary for effectively identifying and removing terrorist content, proportionate proactive measures, including by using automated means in certain cases, are an essential element in tackling the reappearance of terrorist content which has previously been removed or to which access has been disabled because it is considered to be terrorist content online. With a view to reducing the accessibility of terroristsuch content on their services, hosting service providers should assess whether it is appropriate to take proactive measures depending on the risks and level of exposure to terrorist content as well as to the effects on the rights of third parties and the public interest of information. Consequently, hosting service providers should determine what appropriate, effective and proportionate proactive measure should be put in place. This requirement should not imply a general monitoring obligation. In the context of this assessment, the absence of removal orders and referrals addressed to a hosting provider, is an indication of a low level of exposure to terrorist content.
Amendment 154 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) When putting in place such additional proactive measures voluntarily, hosting service providers should ensure that users’ right to freedom of expression and information - including to freely receive and impart information - is preserved. In addition to any requirement laid down in the law, including the legislation on protection of personal data, hosting service providers should act with due diligence and implement safeguards, including notably human oversight and verifications, where appropriate, to avoid any unintended and erroneous decision leading to removal of content that is not terrorist content. This is of particular relevance when hosting service providers use automated means to detect terrorist content. Any decision to use automated means, whether taken by the hosting service provider itself or pursuant to a request by the competent authority, should be assessed with regard to the reliability of the underlying technology and the ensuing impact on fundamental rights.
Amendment 156 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) In order to ensure that hosting service providers exposed to terrorist content take appropriate measures to prevent the misuse of their services, the competent authorities should request hosting service providers having received a removal order, which has become final, to report on the proactive measures taken. These could consist of measures to prevent the re-upload of terrorist content, removed or access to it disabled as a result of a removal order or referrals they received, checking against publicly or privately-held tools containing known terrorist content. They may also employ the use of reliable technical tools to identify new terrorist content, either using those available on the market or those developed by the hosting service provider. The service provider should report on the specific proactive measures in placeThe service provider should report on the proactive measures voluntarily taken in order to allow the competent authority to judge whether the measures are effective and proportionate and whether, if automated means are used, the hosting service provider has the necessary abilities for human oversight and verification. In assessing the effectiveness and proportionality of the measures, competent authorities should take into account relevant parameters including the number of removal orders and referrals issued to the provider, their economic capacity and the impact of its service in disseminating terrorist content (for example, taking into account the number of users in the Union).
Amendment 164 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) Complaint procedures constitute a necessary safeguard against erroneous removal of content, as a consequence of measures taken pursuant to the hosting service provider's terms and conditions protected under the freedom of expression and information. Hosting service providers should therefore establish user-friendly complaint mechanisms and ensure that complaints are dealt with promptly and in full transparency towards the content provider. The requirement for the hosting service provider to reinstate the content where it has been removed in error, does not affect the possibility of hosting service providers to enforce their own terms and conditions on other grounds. Furthermore, content providers, whose content has been removed following a removal order, should have a right to an effective remedy in accordance with Article 19 TEU and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
Amendment 175 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) Penalties are necessary to ensure the effective implementation by hosting service providers of the obligations pursuant to this Regulation. Member States should adopt rules on penalties, including, where appropriate, fining guidelines. Particularly severe penalties shall be ascertained in the event that the hosting service provider systematically fails to remove terrorist content or disable access to it within one hour from receipt of a removal order. Non-compliance in individual cases could be sanctioned while respecting the principles of ne bis in idem and of proportionality and ensuring that such sanctions take account of systematic failure. In order to ensure legal certainty, the regulation should set out to what extent the relevant obligations can be subject to penalties. Penalties for non-compliance with Article 6 should only be adopted in relation to obligations arising from a request to report pursuant to Article 6(2) or a decision imposing additional proactive measures pursuant to Article 6(4). When assessing the nature of the breach and deciding upon applying penalties, full respect should be given to fundamental rights, such as the freedom of expression. When determining whether or not financial penalties should be imposed, due account should be taken of the financial resources of the provider. Member States shall ensure that penalties do not encourage the removal of content which is not terrorist content. When determining whether or not financial penalties should be imposed, due account should be taken of the financial resources of the provider. Member States should ensure that penalties do not encourage the removal of content which is not terrorist content.
Amendment 194 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Member States may establish conditions required by, and in accordance with, fundamental principles relating to the freedom of the press and the freedom and pluralism of the media.
Amendment 205 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – introductory part
(3) 'to offer services in the Union’ means: enabling legal or natural persons in one or more Member States to use the services of the hosting service provider which has a substantial connection to that Member State or Member States, such as the establishment of the hosting service provider in the Union; In the absence of such an establishment, the assessment of a substantial connection shall be based on specific factual criteria, such as:
Amendment 206 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a
Amendment 207 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b
(b) a significant number of users in one or more Member States;
Amendment 209 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
(4) 'terrorist offences' means offences as definne of the intentional acts listed in Article 3(1) of Directive (EU) 2017/541;
Amendment 210 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – introductory part
(5) 'terrorist content' means one or more of the following information:refers to the offences committed intentionally and unlawfully as defined in Articles 5 to 7 in Directive 2017/541 on combating terrorism.
Amendment 216 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point a
Amendment 223 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b
Amendment 229 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point c
Amendment 231 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point d
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point d
Amendment 245 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. Hosting service providers shall include in their terms and conditions that they will not store terrorist content, and apply, provisions to prevent the dissemination of terrorist content.
Amendment 252 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. The competent authority shall have the power to issue a decisionremoval order requiring the hosting service provider to remove terrorist content or disable access to it.
Amendment 270 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. Upon request by the hosting service provider or by the content provider, the competent authority shall, within a reasonable time, provide a detailed supplementary statement of reasons, explaining why the content is considered terrorist content, without prejudice to the obligation of the hosting service provider to comply with the removal order within the deadline set out in paragraph 2.
Amendment 292 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. Hosting service providers shallmay, where appropriate, take proactive measures to protect their services against the dissemination ofreappearance of content which has previously been removed or to which access has been disabled because it is considered to be terrorist content. The measures shall be effective and proportionate, taking into account the risk and level of exposure to terrorist content, the fundamental rights of the users, and the fundamental importance of the freedom of expression and information in an open and democratic society.
Amendment 297 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. The hosting service provider, on its own initiative or upon request from the competent authority of its Member State of establishment, should report on the specific voluntary measures in place in order to allow such authority to judge whether the measures are proportionate and whether, if automated means are used, the hosting service provider has the necessary abilities for human oversight and verification.
Amendment 298 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Amendment 304 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Amendment 308 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Amendment 313 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5
Article 6 – paragraph 5
Amendment 362 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. An appeal as referred to in Article 4(9) shall be lodged with the court of the Member State where the hosting provider has its main establishment or where the legal representative designated by the hosting provider pursuant to Article 16 resides or is established.