Выбрать главу

As with Bahrain, the internet has become a key battleground for the UAE, with the authorities paying great attention to the information viewed by its citizens and resident expatriates. In 2009 a report on internet filtering in the UAE was published by the OpenNet Initiative — a partnership of the University of Toronto, Harvard University, and the SecDev Group of Ottawa. It claimed that the UAE government ‘pervasively filters websites that contain pornography or content relating to alcohol and drug use, gay and lesbian issues, or online dating or gambling’ while concluding that the UAE ‘…continues to prevent its citizens from accessing a significant amount of internet content spanning a variety of topics…’ Interestingly, the report also concluded that the filtering scheme is now being applied to Dubai’s aforementioned free zones, including Dubai Media City, which previously enjoyed unfettered internet access. In 2010, another report claimed that the UAE was going even further than filtering, with its state-owned telecommunications company having been provided by the US-based firm CyberTrust since 2005 with the ability to fake secure connections,[632] despite it being an arm of an authoritarian state. This, it has been argued, allows it to position itself potentially as a ‘man in the middle’ during web transactions between users.[633]

In practice, a wide range of websites and internet activities are now blocked in the UAE, including all of the categories identified by the OpenNet Initiative and those listed in a leaked memorandum from the UAE’s telecommunications regulatory authority.[634] In addition, every website in Arabic or English that contains criticism of the UAE’s ruling families, or indeed other Gulf monarchies’ ruling families, is also blocked, as are websites or sections of websites that focus on human rights, prison conditions, and civil liberties in the region. On occasion even the websites of leading international non-governmental organisations are barred if they feature negative headlines or articles relating to the UAE. Sometimes the websites of major international news organisations will also be temporarily inaccessible if they are carrying a specific headline. A more recent and popular strategy has been to block access to specific articles on the websites of foreign newspapers. In 2009, for example, a lengthy essay about Dubai appearing on The Independent’s website was blocked,[635] while in 2011 a similar article in Vanity Fair was also barred without explanation. In parallel to internet censorship, the UAE’s National Media Council still sometimes requires shops and newsagents to either remove pages or blackout offending articles in the hardcopy versions of these publications. Vanity Fair was reportedly tampered with in this way,[636] while in late 2009 an entire edition of The Sunday Times[637] was removed from the UAE’s shelves and pulped, given that it featured negative reporting on Dubai’s economic problems and a cartoon depicting Dubai’s ruler drowning in a sea of debt.

BlackBerrys have also been subjected to censorship in the UAE, with most attention being focused on its encrypted messenger system which was allowing users to communicate free from monitoring by state-controlled spyware. In 2009 the UAE’s biggest state-owned telecommunications companies began offering a ‘performance enhancing’ patch to its BlackBerry subscribers which claimed that it ‘provided the best BlackBerry service and ultimate experience’. Users reported that the patch slowed down their BlackBerrys and drained its batteries. Research in Motion — the Canadian manufacturer of BlackBerry — quickly released a counter-application to uninstall this patch, explaining that it was in fact a surveillance application designed to allow the UAE authorities to monitor BlackBerry users’ messages and emails.[638] Exactly a year later, the UAE authorities’ worst fears seemed to be realised when small protests began being organised with the help of BlackBerry messenger. In particular, many UAE nationals had been using the messenger to discuss leaked correspondence showing that some government members considered themselves above paying traffic fines,[639] while others were using the messenger to plan protests against the government over increased petrol prices. Although the protests were eventually called off and an eighteen year-old was arrested (because he had included his PIN in a BlackBerry message and thus revealed his identity) along with five other UAE nationals,[640] the prospect of further such protests prompted the UAE authorities to announce a total ban on BlackBerrys in just one month unless Research in Motion provided access codes for the encrypted messaging system. In July 2010 the government announced that ‘BlackBerrys are operating beyond the jurisdiction of national legislation’ because they are ‘the only devices operating in the UAE that immediately export their data offshore’. Tellingly, the statement also claimed that ‘…certain BlackBerry applications allow people to misuse the service, causing serious social, judicial, and national security repercussions’.[641] Placed in a difficult position, given that it appeared that access had already been granted to governments in the US, Britain, China, and Russia, Research in Motion had apparently decided that the UAE authorities should not be granted access to BlackBerry services, presumably due to its track-record of — as described by Reporters without Borders — intimidating BlackBerry subscribers.[642] Although the ban was never imposed, with outspoken UAE lawyers[643] describing it as ‘unconstitutional’ and ‘…a blatant attack on freedom of expression’ in newspaper interviews,[644] it remains unclear whether the UAE authorities’ demands were actually met.

Censorship in Kuwait is also increasingly revolving around the internet and new communications technologies, with arrests of bloggers and social media users now occurring. The authorities still seem to rely on making scapegoat arrests of various Kuwaiti citizens, especially journalists that speak out against the government, or — more seriously — criticise the ruling family. In one remarkable case in 2008, the editor-in-chief of the Al-Shahed newspaper was sentenced to three years in prison and ordered to pay a fine for having ‘insulted the ruler’ despite the ruler having previously written to him ‘forgiving him and wishing him success with the paper’. Although a member of the ruling family himself, the editor was believed to have allowed cartoons of the ruler and the crown prince to have appeared on the newspaper’s entertainment page, with captions asking readers to spot the differences between the two cartoons.[645] Also involving members of the ruling family, in 2010 it was reported that three lesser members of the family had attacked a private television station which had recently aired a comedy show that was deemed offensive to that branch of the family. All parties involved were eventually released on bail, but not before the television station owner had been accused of trying to ‘overthrow the government’.[646] More seriously, also in 2010 a Kuwaiti journalist was sentenced to one year in prison for supposedly ‘undermining the status of the ruler’ and slandering the unpopular prime minister who, as described, was a key member of the ruling family. Specifically, he was accused of saying in public that the prime minister was ‘incapable of running the country’[647] and was also accused of inferring that Iranian intelligence agents were gaining access to Kuwaiti affairs via a prominent businessman who was an associate of the prime minister. Half way through his sentence the journalist was rushed to hospital with a heart condition, but even then he was reportedly still bound by his hands and feet to his bed.[648] Accusations of insulting or undermining the ruler have not been limited to Kuwaiti nationals, and on occasion expatriates have also been arrested. In 2009, for example, an Australian national of Iraqi origin was jailed for six months for supposedly criticising the ruler. She claimed to the international media that she was beaten, on occasion held in solitary confinement, and browbeaten into renouncing her Australian passport. She also claimed she was told to keep repeating that she was really an Iraqi.[649]

вернуться

632

171. Electronic Frontier Foundation, 13 August 2010; New York Times, 13 August 2010.

вернуться

633

172. Slate Magazine, 27 August 2010.

вернуться

634

173. UAE Telecommunications Regulatory Authority, 24 September 2006. The document was entitled ‘Internet Content Filtering Policy and Procedure’.

вернуться

635

174. The Independent, 7 April 2009. The article was entitled ‘The Dark Side of Dubai’.

вернуться

636

175. 7 Days, 10 April 2009.

вернуться

637

176. The Sunday Times, 29 November 2009.

вернуться

638

177. ITP Net, 14 July 2009.

вернуться

639

178. Foreign Policy, 10 August 2010. ‘As the UAE was consumed along with the rest of the world by the World Cup fever in June, a leaked document surfaced and was distributed amongst Emiratis on BlackBerry Messenger. The document appeared to be an official request from the secretary general of the UAE’s parliament… requesting that the Dubai Traffic Department waive the traffic fines of the parliament speaker…’

вернуться

640

179. Reporters without Borders press release, 29 July 2010.

вернуться

641

180. The National, 25 July 2010.

вернуться

642

181. Reporters without Borders press release, 29 July 2010.

вернуться

643

182. E.g. Abdul Hamid Al-Kumaiti.

вернуться

644

183. Asharq Al-Awsat, 4 August 2010.

вернуться

645

184. Arab Times, 14 December 2009.

вернуться

646

185. Gulf News, 20 October 2010.

вернуться

647

186. Kipp Report, 7 April 2010.

вернуться

648

187. Agence France Presse, 7 December 2010.

вернуться

649

188. Agence France Presse, 3 July 2009.