Tag Archives: FAIFE

Intellectual Freedom in Croatia

Leave a Reply

In 2019, FAIFE is marking the 20th anniversary of the Statement on Intellectual Freedom. Over the last few months, we have covered a series of contributions from FAIFE committee members highlighting various perspectives on intellectual freedom in different countries. Today, Davorka Pšenica – a Library Advisor at the Department of Croatian National Bibliography of the National and University Library in Zagreb – is presenting a perspective from Croatia.

1) What do you and your colleagues understand by ‘intellectual freedom’ in Croatia?

Intellectual freedom in the Republic of Croatia means the right to freedom of thought and expression, the freedom to promote ideas and beliefs, and the right of an individual to be informed.

The Constitution of the Republic of Croatia regulates the right to freedom of expression by the provision of Article 38 which reads: “Freedom of thought and expression shall be guaranteed. Freedom of expression shall particularly encompass freedom of the press and other media, freedom of speech and public opinion, and free establishment of all institutions of public communication. Censorship shall be forbidden. Journalists shall have the right to freedom of reporting and access to information. The right to access to information held by any public authority shall be guaranteed. Restrictions on the right to access to information must be proportionate to the nature of the need for such restriction in each individual case and necessary in a free and democratic society, as stipulate by law. The right to correction is guaranteed to anyone who constitutionally and legally established rights have been violated by public communication.”

2) How important an issue is it for libraries, and for the general population, in your country?

One of basic tasks of libraries in Croatia is to ensure free access to information to all citizens –this fundamental role is stated in all the main documents of the Croatian Library Association (CLA). It also underpins the activities of the CLA Committee for Free Access to Information and Freedom of Speech that for 20 years has organized roundtables on free access to information on International Human Rights Day.

At these roundtables, topics related to problems of free access to information, freedom of the media, freedom of speech and censorship, copyright, intellectual freedom and education, and transparency and openness of the organizational and socio-political system in Croatia have all been discussed at all levels.

It is important to highlight the efforts and involvement of the library community in a multi-year process of adopting the first Law on the Right of Access to Information in Croatia. The law was created due to encouragement of the academic community and civil society; its acceptance was preceded by a long-term public campaign led by a coalition of 17 non-governmental organizations, with the participation of the Croatian Library Association. The law has undergone a number of amendments and harmonization with relevant acts of the European Union and has been in force since 9 August 2015.

3) What have been the biggest questions and controversies in recent years?

In Croatia there is a problem of harmonization between, on the one hand, legal regulations concerning free access to information, freedom of the media and speech and regulations concerning free access to the internet, copyright protection, and on the other, a market-based, neoliberal economy that gives priority to capital and large companies. The neoliberal economy can, by introducing collection and citizens’ control systems, impair to a great extent free access to knowledge and information.

4) What do you think are the biggest challenges for intellectual freedom in the coming years?

The greatest challenges are those in the area of intellectual freedom protection, i.e. those relating to free access, accessibility and openness of information. More specifically, the business sector is not legally obliged to provide information to the public, that is, private companies and organizations are not subject to any legal obligation. Moreover, international institutions, such as the World Bank and other financial organizations, have their own rulebooks on providing information about their work.

The regulation of the right of access to information depends on individual national laws. For example, Freedom of Press Act of 1766 in the Kingdom of Sweden is regarded as the first law on the right of access to information. Acts introducing an obligation on public authorities to make their information available to the public mainly only date from the second half of the 20th century. The United Nations has encouraged drafting of the mentioned Acts on the grounds that the right to seek, receive and impart information also implies an obligation of states to allow access to information in their possession.

In Croatia the Right to Free Access to Information Act is a key anti-corruption tool requiring authorities, administration and the public sector to be responsible and report about their work to citizens, i.e. to report how they work, how much and what they spend public money for, how they make decisions, and who participates in this process.

This is how citizens and especially media and associations, as guardians of democracy and promoters of public interest, can hold the government and administration and make them remember they are here for citizens and for the public interest. Progress has been achieved at the level of the state administration, as the result, among other things, of bigger capacities to prepare, publish and provide information to the user. According to analyses, 60 to 80% of statutory information in Croatia is published, depending on the state institution.

The biggest problems appear in small municipalities, some of which continuously ignore citizens and fail to fulfill their legal obligations. This is a problem for public libraries too, because they depend on local authorities and therefore operate under harsh conditions in terms of limited procurement power, availability of library materials and information in the online environment. As a result of insufficient libraries funding and a lack of clearly expressed libraries policy, there is therefore a limit to the free flow of information flow more broadly.

5) What role do you see libraries playing in relation to intellectual freedom in 10 years’ time?

Librarians in Croatia are aware of the important role of libraries in promoting fundamental human rights such as intellectual freedom, freedom of thought and speech and the right to free access to information, but the state and local government’s support for, and understanding of, library programs and tasks is still insufficient.

That is why it is extremely important for the library community to take a proactive role in the society into the future, in terms of advocacy and lobbying for libraries and library programs as well as activities at all levels. This should include a focus on ensuring adequate funding for the acquisition of materials and equipment, and efforts to balance conditions under which different categories of users can use the library.

Librarians must actively and publicly advocate the defense of intellectual freedom whenever freedom is in danger of being limited or diminished. Intellectual freedom means the right to freedom of thought and expression, based on which the right of an individual to be informed is derived. The librarian must provide users with the information needed for communication about a topic and must actively prevent any attempt to obstruct a transfer of information to users.

 

You can read more about the work of Croatian libraries to promote access to information, intellectual freedom and other human rights in IFLA’s submission to the Universal Periodic Review in Croatia.

Intellectual Freedom in Japan

Leave a Reply

FAIFE is marking the 20th anniversary of the IFLA Statement on Intellectual Freedom. As part of this, we had a chat with Yasuyo Inoue, expert advisor to the FAIFE Committee and Professor of Library Science at Dokkyo University, to find out more about intellectual freedom in Japan from her personal perspective.

1) What do you and your colleagues understand by ‘intellectual freedom’ in Japan?

知的自由 means ‘Intellectual freedom’ in Japanese. It includes free expression, free access to information at libraries and free access to information at national/local government offices. It is linked to the same concepts as those discussed in IFLA FAIFE and is essential for libraries in Japan.

2) How important an issue is it for libraries, and for the general population, in Japan?

The Japan Library Association adopted in 1954 its own statement on intellectual freedom in libraries. The Association has furthermore noted the IFLA Statement on Intellectual Freedom at Libraries, given that this concept is a core value for Japanese libraries including public, school and academic libraries.

Generally speaking, people in Japan are often more interested in free expression rather than free access to information in libraries. In Japan people think that libraries are only a place for studying and are mainly for students. It is difficult for many to imagine that libraries – especially public libraries – are public spaces for communication and information flow.

3) What have been the biggest questions and controversies in recent years?

There have been several cases of intellectual freedom being threatened in Japan.

In 2005, the Supreme Court ruled that libraries have the right to decide which books or documents are to be selected and provided. This was related to the case of the Funabashi Library, where a librarian made available more than 100 books with rather right-wing content without following the appropriate method.

In 2013, the manga book titled “Barefoot Gen”, as well as elementary school libraries holding copies of this book were attacked by an extreme-right wing group. The group claimed that the book included excessive violent expression and were not suitable for small children. The group insisted that the book should be removed from the shelves of all school libraries! It later came out that the group wished the book banned, not due to the violence, but because of the main character disliked the Emperor of Japan because of the war and the atomic bombs. Even so, still more and more people are signing petitions to local governments to ban this manga book from the shelves at school libraries.

In January, the copyright law was changed because of the ratification of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), to which Japan is a signatory. The issues of digitisation, notably in order to preserve materials was addressed, with a decision to wait a further 20 years to start the process of digitisation. Though public libraries are an exception, private companies, NGOs and other organisations are facing many challenges. This is a huge issue, in particular for disabled people and to free access to information in general.

Furthermore, the Japanese government has planned to raise the sales tax rate to 10%. Publishers are demanding books and other media commodities should be excepted from this raise. To this the Government answered that if the publishers stop making “harmful books”, they may be ready to act. The publishers insist that this reaction is against free expression.

We have also recently seen several cases of library users’ private information being compromised.

Earlier this year, the police of Tomakomai city searched library users’ reading records without warrant. The library had agreed to show the documents, though the act by the police was illegal.

Also the company CCC has publicly admitted that they provide clients’ private information to authorities. This company manages several public libraries and provides its own card, for which clients can get points every time they buy something or use it as library card.

4) What do you think are the biggest challenges for intellectual freedom in the coming years?

I see the biggest challenges as big data and the protection of private information. This is a huge issue for libraries, and it is important that we get involved. Participating in Internet Governance Forum activities is a great way to do this.

I also see copyright issues and free access to information, especially related to AI as big challenge.

Furthermore, is the lack of full-time professional librarians who are trained in intellectual freedom in libraries an issue, as well as the increase in privatised public libraries.

5) What role do you see libraries playing in relation to intellectual freedom in 10 years’ time?

In Japan, future librarians will be more like social workers and educators who make services for the people facing difficulties to get access to the information they need. There will also be more services for reading-challenged people, seniors and foreigners/immigrants who cannot read Japanese.

 

Going Beyond – Promoting Vulnerable Voices in Libraries

Leave a Reply

IFLA’s Intellectual Freedom Statement turns 20 in 2019. This is the first in a series offering perspectives, and raising questions, about its different provisions. 

 

A recent TechDirt blog highlighted an effort by Cloudfare – one of the biggest companies offering content delivery services on the internet – to protect particular sites and services.

Through its Project Galileo, Cloudfare looks to offer ‘some of the most politically and artistically important work online’ free use of the best available defences against cyberattacks.

It raises two interesting points.

First of all, there is the reality that while any site can be targeted using cyber-weaponry, that some are more vulnerable than others.

Both governments and private groups can use various techniques to stop particular sites from operating. Cloudfare already works to protect voter registration and other electoral sites for example.

Secondly, there is the parallel with debates about whether particular content should be regulated or blocked (as opposed to which content should be protected). In effect, should some sites be treated better (or worse) than others? And how should decisions about this be made?

 

How does this relate to the work of libraries ?

First of all, it is clear that certain books in libraries are more likely to face criticism and requests for removal than others. The problem seems worst for content addressing LGBTQ+ issues, that addressing particular political or religious themes and other books and materials deemed offensive by particular groups.

IFLA’s own Statement on Intellectual Freedom argues that content should be selected on professional grounds, and reflect the diversity of the community. It speaks out against discrimination in general (without distinguishing between positive and negative discrimination).

Meanwhile, the Public Library Manifesto stresses that ‘Collections and services should not be subject to any form of ideological, political or religious censorship, nor commercial pressures’.

While complaints from local politicians and members of the community may require a different sort of response to a cyberattack, the response is still necessary. A number of librarians and library associations have done so, highlighting both the challenges of censorship in general, and celebrating those books which face the most criticism.

 

This leads to the question of how – and whether – libraries should go out of their way to support works which may not prove popular with some.

The spirit of the Statement on Intellectual Freedom, as well as the Public Library Manifesto, certainly goes in the direction of actively providing a diverse range of content, reflecting a diverse range of interests – including the artistically and politically important work targeted by Cloudfare. Many of the types of content frequently subject to challenge are indeed connected with the interests, of certain groups.

But what does this mean for what libraries can and should do to acquire diverse – and sometimes difficult – content, especially given inevitable budget constraints? How does it affect the way libraries promote and display works? How can libraries best defend the choices they make when challenged?

Cloudfare can clearly rely on a panel of experts, but this is not likely to be possible for libraries. What do you think about how libraries can (or should) champion intellectual freedom by supporting vulnerable voices, in the face of opposition and challenges.

World Press Freedom Day 2019

Leave a Reply

By providing access to information, knowledge, ideas and opinions, libraries everywhere uphold the value of intellectual freedom as the basis of an informed, democratic society.

They do this both by acting as the guardians of manuscripts, documents and books, and as a place where anyone can access the information they contain.

Press publications already form a core part of many collections. But libraries are also increasingly realising their role not just as a place to access, but also to share and create information., including by supporting journalism and public debate.

Today, 3 May, we celebrate World Press Freedom Day to support, and raise awareness of the fundamental principles of press freedom and freedom of expression!

World Press Freedom Day was proclaimed by the United Nations General Assembly in 1993 following a Recommendation adopted at the twenty-sixth session of UNESCO’s General Conference in 1991.

It serves as an occasion to inform citizens of violations of press freedom, as well as a reminder of the censorship still seen in many countries today. It also recalls the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) Article 19:

“Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”

Librarians fighting for the right to speak up

Journalists, editors, publishers and librarians can often be targeted by those who wish to restrain press freedom and punished for bringing news and information to the public.

In a recent incident, a librarian in Kansas City, US was arrested simply for standing up for a library patron’s right to free speech during a public event featuring a former US diplomat at the library.

The library hosts between twelve and twenty speakers each month, and though some of the topics and speakers have been controversial, the events have always been peaceful.

None the less, both the librarian and the patron were faced with criminal charges. 6 months ago, the case went to trial and the librarian was found not guilty on the charges of obstruction, interfering with an arrest, and assaulting a police officer.

The Director of the library stated:

“The library, like the judge, has consistently expressed surprise that this ever went to trial, that a public event at a public library should result in the indictment of a librarian.”

Another recent incident is the cause of Natalia Sharina, former Director of the state-run Library of Ukrainian Literature in Moscow.

In June 2017, she was found guilty of ‘incitement of hatred’ toward Russian people and ‘embezzlement’ and handed-down a four year suspended sentence for holding ‘extremist literature’. Sharina has spent 19 months under house arrest, throughout the investigation and trial.

PEN International believes that the case against Sharina is politically motivated and calls for her sentence and conviction to be overturned. Not only is it far from certain that the books in question were part of the collection, but even if they had been, this should not be a cause for arrest and detention.

IFLA has been following the case and published a statement on the judgement calling for authorities in Russia, and around the world, to bring banning of books and the persecution of librarians to an end.

Unfortunately, these cases are not unique. Librarians worldwide are facing struggle in claiming the rights to freedom of opinion and expression.

Today, on World Press Freedom Day, we celebrate the right to freedom of expression and opinion, and we remind that the support is still needed, and there is still much more to be done.

What is the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) and why libraries should get involved

Leave a Reply

There is little doubt about the importance of human rights in the library world. Outside too, few will dismiss them openly, even if their actions speak differently. However, there are concerns about their enforcement – what use are principles if they are not turned into reality?

Many countries have of course integrated many (most) aspects of key international human rights texts into national law. In the case of Europe, there is even an international court which has the power to go against the decisions and policies of independent states.

However, even where human rights feature in national legislation and constitutions, their application is only as strong as the rule of law – and this is highly variable.

Universal Periodic Reviews (UPRs) are a response to concern about the lack of impact of the UN’s human rights work. Launched in March 2006 under the auspices of the Human Rights Council, the process monitors and reviews the human rights situation of all 193 UN Member States. Its goal is to promote improvements and address violations wherever they occur, as well as to share best human rights practices around the globe.

How do UPRs work?

The reviews are ‘state-led’. This means that it is governments (rather than independent experts or the United Nations) which control the process. The reviews are formally conducted by the UPR Working Group (48 Member States) which meets three times a year for two weeks at a time. Each review is facilitated by groups of three States, known as “troikas”, who serve as rapporteurs.

In preparation for the Review, a Member State will provide a ‘national report’ on their own work to fulfil international human rights law. UN Special Rapporteurs (for example on Freedom of Expression or Cultural Rights), Treaty Bodies (such as the Commission the Rights of Persons with Disabilities), other UN entities, other Member States and NGOs can also submit information.

The UPR assesses human rights obligations as set out in: (1) the UN Charter; (2) the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; (3) human rights instruments to which the State is party (human rights treaties ratified by the State concerned); (4) voluntary pledges and commitments made by the State (e.g. national human rights policies and/or programmes implemented); and, (5) applicable international humanitarian law.

Each review consists of an interactive discussion between the state under review and the other UN member states, lasting about three and a half hours. In the course of the discussion, states under review can declare what actions they have taken to improve the human rights situations in their countries and to fulfil their human rights obligations.

The review process takes place in cycles. During its first cycle (2008-2011), all UN Member States were reviewed. The second cycle (20012-2016) reviewed 42 states, and the third cycle (2017-2021) is currently reviewing 48 countries.

Why is relevant to libraries?

As highlighted, libraries have a key interest in human rights. Freedom of access to information and freedom of expression are clearly central, but as IFLA’s series of blogs in the run up to the 70th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights set out, other rights are also significant.

Where this is possible, librarians are often active in defending and promoting human rights, and watching out for problems. They can use different opportunities – national or local-level advocacy and lobbying, complaints to national human rights institutions, or other actions – to make progress.

UPRs offer the possibility to add action at the global level. Given that they welcome input from civil society, there is the opportunity for libraries to raise concerns or make recommendations. These feed into a stakeholder report, and can be cited by the UN or other Member States. Where this happens, there is a chance that such recommendations will form part of the published final report.

Libraries can also attend the UPR Working Group sessions and can make oral statements at the regular session of the Human Rights Council when the outcome of the State reviews are considered.

In an ideal situation, a Member State will then face a formal (and public) recommendation to act. Some examples taken from recent reviews are below:

  • Review legislation in order to ensure that all legislation, including any laws regulating the internet access to information, comply with international human rights standards protecting freedom of expression and freedom of assembly.
  • Make amendments to the Protection of State Information Bill with a view to guaranteeing the right to access to information and freedom of expression.
  • Continue efforts to ensure the right to access to information and freedom of expression by adopting regulations that would be in accordance with both the Constitution and international treaties and commitments.
  • Continue providing human rights education, in particular through access to information and promoting existing mechanisms for protection and reparation
  • Strengthen health information services, particularly with regard to sexual and reproductive health, and ensure that they are accessible to young people and persons with disabilities.

Practical issues

Submissions have usually a deadline and they must adhere to a specified format, and should not exceed five pages (or ten pages if submission is by a coalition of stakeholders). They are meant to be public documents and openly accessible and shareable, and ideally will be the result of coordination at the national level.

Deadlines for submissions are relatively early, in order to allow time to prepare reviews. For example, documents for the 34th session (to be held in October-November 2019) need to be sent by 28 March 2019. A full list of sessions, countries under review, and dates is available on the UPR website. More information on submissions are available online through this report.

In person participation at reviews is possible but requires accreditation, but a priori only in an observer status (i.e. it is not possible to speak). Accredited stakeholders can also attend and make oral statements during the regular sessions of the Human Rights Council when the outcomes of the State reviews are considered.

Reflections

UPRs clearly do offer an opportunity to highlight areas where improvements could be made to national human rights practices in order to benefit libraries and their users. In turn, recommendations resulting from UPRs can be a powerful tool in advocacy at the national and local levels.

At the same time, it is important to be realistic about the impact that can be had. The power of recommendations will depend on how likely governments are to listen (variable). Furthermore, some dismiss the process as a whole given the equal status it gives to all countries, regardless of their own human rights record.

Your views on libraries and Universal Periodic Reviews are welcome!