Breathe
By Itzel Castañares, journalist graduated from UNAM specialized in business and telecommunications with more than a decade of experience. She has worked in media such as 24 Horas, Infosel, Economía Hoy, El Financiero and EL CEO, as well as some collaborations in Grupo Milenio.
The government of President Andrés Manuel López Obrador will be remembered, among many other things, for promoting initiatives such as the National Registry of Mobile Telephone Users (Panaut) and creating the General Law of Civil Registry Operations, as well as devising a Mexican State social network and attempting to eliminate the National Institute of Transparency, Access to Information and Protection of Personal Data (INAI), which not only contravenes citizens, but also the free exercise of journalism in Mexico.
The intention to make changes in the digital environment, transparency and personal data entail a latent risk of censorship, of blocking access to public information and, also, of seeing privacy violated, by placing at the mercy of an authority the domain of private personal information and biometric data.
All this, under a veil of control by the State, having the baton on the criteria and mechanisms to implement each of the proposals, without clarity on how rights will be guaranteed, from access and management of data in Civil Registries or in the famous social network, to how access to information of public interest in the hands of the obligated subjects will be guaranteed.
In its most recent Annual Report on Human Rights Practicesthe United States warned of 'significant concerns' about possible restrictions on freedom of expression and the media in Mexico.
The warning comes after months of cyber hacking by the Guacamaya collective against federal government entities such as the Army, the Ministry of Infrastructure, Communications and Transportation, Petróleos Mexicanos and even the National Lottery.
This reveals the vulnerability of the cyber infrastructure in government agencies, which, although it implied the loss of sensitive information, also made it possible to obtain information of public interest that wanted to be hidden at all costs to avoid government accountability.
To this must be added the cases of spying on civilians by the Secretariat of National Defense (Sedena) -which included activists and journalists- through the Pegasus software, stalking that reached Alejandro Encinas, now Undersecretary of Human Rights and close to the President, and the announcement of the definitive closure of Notimex, the Mexican State news agency that should have been a source of information for society but became an instrument to attack journalists, after more than three years on strike and under a record budget of 237.6 million pesos.
This scenario takes place in the midst of a constant attack by the president in his morning conferences, where day after day he disqualifies journalistic work, going to the extreme of establishing the section "Who is who in lies", in which he disqualifies those media or journalists who question his government, a fact that has been criticized by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR).
And, to top it all off, proposals from academia by those close to the president, such as a decalogue on digital rights that stems from a study program of the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) led by Jonh Ackerman, close to the self-styled Fourth Transformation (4T) and husband of Irma Eréndira Sandoval, a former federal official in López Obrador's government.
Setback to personal data
Although the creation of a Mexican social network only remained as an idea of López Obrador and the disappearance of INAI is not a fact, the legislative machinery, mainly from the Morenista party, 'revived' Panaut in a new law, under the tutelage of the Ministry of the Interior.
In order to understand the turn of events, it is necessary to understand the origin and purpose of Panaut, an updated version of the National Registry of Mobile Telephony Users (Renaut) -which emerged during the six-year term of then President Felipe Calderón- which was created for the sake of national security under the argument of preventing and avoiding crimes, with the purpose of collecting personal and biometric data such as facial recognition, iris and fingerprints of mobile telephone users in the country.
However, despite the fact that such registry was endorsed in Congress, the rejection of the initiative and the consequent promotion of appeals, as well as actions of unconstitutionality and constitutional controversies before the highest judicial authority resulted in a discussion in the Plenary of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) in which the ministers decided to reject the proposal by identifying several affectations to the privacy and protection of users' data.
"The Plenary Court determined to declare the total invalidity of the register, mainly because it did not pass a proportionality test aimed at analyzing the restriction to the right to privacy and data protection in general and, specifically, because there are alternative measures equally suitable to ensure public safety, but less harmful to these rights," said the Court.
However, only in March of this year, the creation of the General Law of Civil Registry Operations gave a setback to Panaut's refusal because, with this new regulation, the collection of biometric data of the population is established, although without specifying what they are and under the warning that the law will punish anyone who accesses the National Registry and Identity System (SID) without authorization or who leaks confidential data.
For Michel Hernandez, director of the Telecommunications Observatory (Observatel), the most worrying aspect of the registration of biometric data is the violation of privacy, as it implies the protection of personal data and privacy, and individuals would be forced to defend themselves against individuals who already collect this data, such as mobile operators or banks.
The truth is that, for the specialist, the Mexican State is the one who must protect the privacy of citizens and not interfere in it under the unfounded justification of protecting security - as was the Panaut - or to have more order in civil registries nationwide, as established by the new law.
Decalogue with 'buts
The 'Decalogue of Digital Rights in Social Networks' is a project whose purpose is to evolve into law initiatives and whose objectives are to protect freedom of expression, provide tools to Internet users and limit the scope of large social networks to user data.
This material was developed during the last year by Tlatelolco Lab, the unit of the University Program of Studies on Democracy, Justice and Society (PUEDJS) of the UNAM led by Ackerman, an academic of the maximum house of studies and close to the self-styled fourth transformation (4T).
The presentation, which was attended by legislators, academics and representatives of civil organizations that defend human rights in the social environment and promote technology for social purposes, had points of agreement and a generally positive vision of the Decalogue.
However, they also warned of risks to freedom of expression and the treatment of personal data, mainly, of scaling the content to law initiatives as it is now structured, without prior discussion and without considering interested voices.
All this, in order to avoid prior censorship practices and for the State to assume control of the information and be the one to determine what is and what is not truthful.
Irene Levy, a lawyer specializing in telecommunications and the digital environment, considers that one of the alerts that the Decalogue raises is its wording, as it is ideologically charged and aligned with the 4T, which, in her opinion, "in some way could discredit the impartiality of the proposal," she said recently in her weekly commentary on Radio Educación.
There are many more things to analyze in the outlook and in a next installment I will review the pending issues in cybersecurity, digital strategy and the role of the legislature in these matters.
The opinions expressed are the responsibility of the authors and are absolutely independent of the position and editorial line of Opinion 51.
More than 150 opinions from 100 columnists await you for less than one book per month.
Comments ()