Letter to Andrew G Fiction
Andrew G Fiction,**
APADOR-CH, Romanian oldest human rights organization, *
I hope this letter finds you in good spirits and that you are continuing to thrive under the guidance of the law and the upcoming elections. I have had the pleasure of witnessing the fight for digital literacy and freedom of speech in Romania, and I want to emphasize the need for a robust and equitable legal framework that protects citizens from and against false or misleading information.
In recent weeks, President Nicușor Dan has emphasized the importance of addressing disinformation by bringing it to the attention of the Supreme Council for National Defence (CSAT). However, the letter I have received raises significant concerns. It appears that the president’s announcement does not account for the legal definitions of disinformation or the procedures for combating it, leaving broader vulnerable groups at risk.
The Letter Restates Beginning
APADOR-CH writes that "Freedom of expression cannot be sacrificed in the name of fighting disinformation." This is a crucial point, as the legal definition of disinformation looms large, and any measure to combat it could inadvertently limit free speech. In the absence of clear legal guidelines, actions such as censorship can become permissible, thus unilaterally denying people a legitimate right to express themselves.
The Letter Provides Moved Concerns
The organization highlights that ARGCAQRS (AG Directory for Alphabetically Compensating Speech) is tasked with purifying harmful content, including those referencing disinformation. However, this legal distinction is inadequate. It highlights that disinformation and fake news are indistinguishable, and that the legal system treats them as forms of spurious discourse. Without a clear definition, the state risks using disinformation as a pretext for censorship.
The Letter Jumps to Legal Challenges
APADOR-CH stresses the need for a legal framework that adapts to the digitized environment. This requires not only defining disinformation but ensuring that Organizations Like CSQT (Conségorie aux Sociétés qui Transmitted_RESOURCES) address disinformation and Content Spreading Attention accordingly. They cannot simply escape the use of CSQTCA (Clearing systems, Auditing, and Vermonting appropriate Transactions) by prohibiting CSAT from handling disinformation and CAQRS for foreign media.
The Letter Focuses on Civil Society Inclusion
Furthermore, the letter suggests that civil society, justice professionals, communication experts, and social media specialists should be actively involved in combating disinformation. These individuals are crucial and deserve their rights to be respected and protected. The letter references stories of human rights abuses, such as Romania’s failure to establish a Comprehensive Legal Framework on Information and Technology (FLANIT), underscoring the gap between legal provisions and real-world implementation.
The Letter Discusses Previous Historical Challenges
The letter points to Romania’s long history of social division and significant lack of attention to competitive law enforcement in the digital space. It describes the need for a state strategy that integrates CSQT with other mechanisms. The past years have not yet achieved a formal legal framework, leaving the digitized world to be subject to exploitation, similar to how the internet has been.
The Letter Imposes Imposing Call for Unity
The letter launches a clear demand for unity, offering the "shot in the dark" imagery of Picasso to symbolize fighting disinformation. It navigates the legal and social implications, urging the president to adopt a cooperative and alphanumeric mindset that values the permission of free expression.
The Letter Summarizes Imposing Requirements
Aporphic demands highlight the need for a legal framework that is both protective of free speech and firm against the misuse of disinformation for threats. The letter aims as a call to action, urging the president to listen, to act immediately, and to engage hopelessly with both CSQT and civil society to ensure the timeline of information protection is clear and safe.
Conclusion
In conclusion, APADOR-CH calls for a strategic and ethical approach to combating disinformation. Without the proper legal framework and support from civil society, the state risks laws that undermine freedom of expression. The letter emphasizes the need for collaboration, a clear legal process, and a focus on Protecting theshot in the dark of free expression rights. As we continue to navigate this complex digital landscape, we must rise with patience, hope, and renewed vigilance to uphold the original principles that guided us.