diff --git a/_layouts/indexpage.html b/_layouts/indexpage.html index ee20aa99..eb20968b 100644 --- a/_layouts/indexpage.html +++ b/_layouts/indexpage.html @@ -68,7 +68,8 @@ layout: default

{{ question.heading }}

- {{ question.content | markdownify }} +

{{ question.answer }}

+ {{ question.explanation | markdownify }}
{% endfor %} diff --git a/_pages/index-da.md b/_pages/index-da.md index 02701c5a..243135bc 100644 --- a/_pages/index-da.md +++ b/_pages/index-da.md @@ -45,27 +45,31 @@ sections: content: - heading: Hvorfor Søren Pape? id: hvorforPape - content: | - Fordi han er justitsminister. Logning var også ulovligt da Søren Pind, Mette Frederiksen, Karen Hækkerup, Morten Bødskov og Brian Mikkelsen var justitsministre, så det er ikke et spørgsmål om politiske holdninger. Det er et spørgsmål om at respektere fundamentale rettigheder, herunder alles ret til privatliv. + answer: Fordi han er justitsminister. + explanation: | + Logning var også ulovligt da Søren Pind, Mette Frederiksen, Karen Hækkerup, Morten Bødskov og Brian Mikkelsen var justitsministre, så det er ikke et spørgsmål om politiske holdninger. Det er et spørgsmål om at respektere fundamentale rettigheder, herunder alles ret til privatliv. Sagen vil forhåbentlig ændre danske politikeres åbenlyse og intentionelle overtrædelser af menneskeretten. - heading: Hvorfor ikke TDC? id: hvorforIkkeTDC - content: | + answer: Fordi Pape skrev et brev, hvor der står at de skal overvåge ulovligt. + explanation: | TDC’s *påstand* er *juridisk vildfarelse*. Det betyder at de ikke kan stilles til ansvar for at gøre noget ulovligt, fordi de ikke kunne forventes at forstå at det var ulovligt. Med [Papes brev til Teleindustrien](assets/files/PapesBrevTilTeleindustrien.pdf) står de bedre. Men der er stadig en forventning om at man skal kunne indse at en ordre er ulovlig. Også når den kommer fra en minister. Det er både hårdere og dyrere at gå efter Justitsministeriet i stedet, men til gengæld kan det ændre retstilstanden i Danmark. Og måske politikernes aktive overtrædelse af vores rettigheder. - heading: Er der domstolskontrol med adgang til data? id: domstolskontrol - content: | - Nej. Hvis du traditionelt skulle aflyttes, skulle politiet gå til domstolene, og her blev du tildelt en advokat. Når aflytningen var færdig, fik du det at vide. + answer: Nej. + explanation: | + Hvis du traditionelt skulle aflyttes, skulle politiet gå til domstolene, og her blev du tildelt en advokat. Når aflytningen var færdig, fik du det at vide. Hvis politiet vil have logningsdata om dig, er det op til telebranchen at hyre og lønne en advokat på dine vegne. Det gør de (selvfølgelig) ikke, og derfor kan domstolene ikke træffe en rimelig afgørelse. Når det drejer sig om oplysninger om IP-adresser har politiet forfattet en standard-skrivelse, der tager udgangspunkt i at udbyderne altid udleverer hvad der bedes om. Når teleselskaberne selv tilgår dine data, bliver ingen hørt eller orienteret. - heading: Hvorfor skal jeg bekymre mig om logning? Jeg har intet at skjule, så hvis det hjælper mod kriminalitet går jeg ind for logning! id: whyBother - content: | + answer: Det er en myte at logning hjælper politiet. + explanation: | Total overvågning hjælper ikke nødvendigvis imod kriminalitet. Det **kan** give flere sigtelser og dømte, men primært fordi flere uskyldige vil blive straffet. Hvis der bliver begået en forbrydelse i en demokratisk retsstat skal politiet og ofrene arbejde sammen for at identificere hvem der kunne have en interesse i at begå forbrydelsen, hvem der havde skaffet sig adgang til gerningsstedet, og hvem der har udvist mistænkelig adfærd. Med totalovervågning kan politiet trække en liste over alle personer der var i nærheden af gerningsstedet, og derefter vælge hvem de lettest kan få dømt. Det er derfor dit ansvar at bevise at du ikke har begået en forbrydelse. Anklageren behøver ikke finde et motiv, eller bevise at du har handlet på en bestemt måde. De kan bare vælge dig fra listen over mobiltelefoner der har været i området, eller blandt folk der har googlet “brækjern” 24 timer før. @@ -75,12 +79,15 @@ sections: I Tyskland blev logningen standset tidligt. Max Planck-instituttet har lavet [en kvalitativ undersøgelse](https://www.mpicc.de/de/forschung/forschungsarbeit/kriminologie/vorratsdatenspeicherung.html) som viser at logningsdata ikke hjalp politiet med opklaring. - heading: Hvem står bag søgsmålet? id: whoAreYou - content: | + answer: Foreningen imod Ulovlig Logning. + explanation: | Menneskeretsjurist [Rasmus Malver](https://twitter.com/rasmusmalver) startede indsamlingen, og den næste store donor var [Bitbureauet](https://bitbureauet.dk/). Derfra tog det fart, og flere hundrede andre personer, virksomheder og foreninger har doneret til sagen. De indsamlede penge “tilhører” en forening hvis eneste formål er at føre retssagen og at sprede budskabet. Du kan læse [vedtægterne](assets/files/vedtaegter.pdf) her. Foreningen har valgt IT- og EU-retsspecialistkontoret [Bird & Bird](https://www.twobirds.com), hvor advokat Martin von Haller er primær tovholder. - heading: Hvad har logning med menneskeret at gøre? - content: | + id: humanRights + answer: Du har ret til privatliv. + explanation: | Menneskeret er dine rettigheder overfor stater. I nogle lande fremgår de af forfatningen, men i Danmark er de primært kommet fra Den Europæiske Menneskerettighedskonvention ([pdf](http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf)). Den blev skrevet efter 2. verdenskrig og er løbende blevet opdateret, for at undgå en gentagelse af Nazityskland og Østblokkens rædsler. I år 2000 skrev EU et Charter om Grundlæggende Rettigheder ([pdf](http://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_da.pdf)) der indgår på overstatsligt niveau, dog kun for emner omfattet af EU-samarbejdet. Begge konventioner indeholder en beskyttelse af dit privatliv, og det er slået klart fast at staten ikke må overvåge alle konstant. Men det gør Danmark. @@ -89,7 +96,8 @@ sections: Du har ret til at være fri for dén overvågning. - heading: Hvorfor ikke fri proces? id: hvorforIkkeFriProces - content: | + answer: Man får ikke penge nok, så sagen ville dø, før den startede. + explanation: | Hvis staten tildeler fri proces, må man ikke selv betale en del af advokatens regning. Fri proces dækker dog ikke advokatens egentlige regning, men består i stedet af et symbolsk beløb. Den danske stats advokat, Kammeradvokaten, er én af verdens dyreste advokater, men deres regning indgår ikke i udmålingen af det de tilkendte sagsomkostninger ved fri proces. Derfor er en fri proces-sag mod Kammeradvokaten en meget ulige kamp. Staten skulle dække begge siders omkostninger, men Kammeradvokaten kan selv bestemme hvor meget de skal have, mens staten bestemmer hvad der betales til borgerens advokat. Det er naturligvis i strid med retten til en retfærdig rettergang, men de danske domstole lader til at foretrække status quo. @@ -97,19 +105,26 @@ sections: Du kan læse mere om emnet i bogen “Med Staten som Modpart” (pdf) udgivet af Retssikkerhedsfonden. - heading: Økonomi & Delmål id: delmaal - content: | + answer: Vi ved ikke hvad det vil koste, så vi bliver ved med at samle ind. + explanation: | Da vi nåede vores første delmål, 100.000 kr, skrev vores advokater en udførlig stævning. Med pengene fra det næste delmål, 250.000 kr, har vi råd til at stævne justitsminister Søren Pape, som repræsentant for den danske stat. Vi ved ikke hvor meget det vil ende med at koste, så vores næste mål er 400.000 kr. Selvom det lyder af meget, er det kun en brøkdel af hvad staten vil bruge. Det er dyrt at sikre vores rettigheder, og vi har tænkt os at gå hele vejen! - heading: Tjener i nogle penge på det her? Hvad hvis der er penge i overskud? - content: | - Nej. Pengene går til at betale advokatkontoret ([Bird & Bird](https://www.twobirds.com)) og til at betale sagsomkostninger. Hvis der er penge “til overs” vil de gå til informationsmateriale om logning og/eller til en non-profit-organisation med samme formål. + id: areYouMakingMoney + answer: Nej, og hvis det er penge til overs går de til et lignende formål. + explanation: | + Pengene går til at betale advokatkontoret ([Bird & Bird](https://www.twobirds.com)) og til at betale sagsomkostninger. Hvis der er penge “til overs” vil de gå til informationsmateriale om logning og/eller til en non-profit-organisation med samme formål. - heading: Hvad er det egentligt der bliver logget om mig? - content: | + id: whatIsBeingLoggedAboutMe + answer: Bl.a. hvilken telefon du har, hvor du er og hvem du kommunikerer med. + explanation: | Hvor din mobil er på alle tidspunkter af døgnet, hvem du kommunikerer med og i et vist omfang hvad du laver på nettet. Du kan bede din udbyder sende dig en kopi af alt hvad de har registreret. Det kan koste op til 200 kr. - heading: Ministeren siger at han skal bruge tid på at ændre lovgivningen, det er vel fair nok? - content: | - Nej. Allerede da totalovervågningen blev indført fik den danske stat at vide at det ville være ulovligt. + id: ministerFair + answer: Nej. + explanation: | + Allerede da totalovervågningen blev indført fik den danske stat at vide at det ville være ulovligt. En lov og en bekendtgørelse kan være ulovlige, hvis de eks. strider imod en overstatslig regel, i dette tilfælde EU-Charteret, eller hvis de underforstået ønsker at overholde Menneskerettighedskonventionen. @@ -122,8 +137,9 @@ sections: Logning er en kriminel handling og den eneste grund til at justitsministeren ikke sidder i fængsel, er at kun Folketinget kan stille ham foran en dommer. - heading: Har I overvejet borgerforslag.dk? id: borgerforslag - content: | - Ja. Men vi har fravalgt det, fordi det ikke er et politisk spørgsmål. Logningen er ulovlig, og det er der ingen tvivl om. Retssagen bliver en kavalkade af undvigelsesmanøvrer, forsinkelsestaktikker og bullshitting fra statens side. Kammeradvokaten er specialist i at ændre fokus, og det bliver en cirkusforestilling af en anden verden. + answer: Ja, men det vil smadre hele formålet. + explanation: | + Vi har fravalgt borgerforslag.dk, fordi det ikke er et politisk spørgsmål. Logningen er ulovlig, og det er der ingen tvivl om. Retssagen bliver en kavalkade af undvigelsesmanøvrer, forsinkelsestaktikker og bullshitting fra statens side. Kammeradvokaten er specialist i at ændre fokus, og det bliver en cirkusforestilling af en anden verden. Derfor er det nødvendigt at vi holder fokus. Et borgerforslag kan blive til et beslutningsforslag i Folketinget, og det vil fjerne fokus. Det vil også være i strid med [Grundlovens § 3](https://www.retsinformation.dk/Forms/R0710.aspx?id=45902#P3), for Folketinget må kun bestemme politiske ting. De må ikke sige at noget er ulovligt. De kan forholde sig til at noget er ulovligt, men det gør de allerede. Langsomt. diff --git a/_pages/index-en.md b/_pages/index-en.md index 7aba9dd1..3e1fd404 100644 --- a/_pages/index-en.md +++ b/_pages/index-en.md @@ -43,51 +43,59 @@ sections: link: FAQ content: - heading: Why Søren Pape? - content: | - Because he is the relevant minister. Data retention was equally illegal when Søren Pind (V), Mette Frederiksen (S), Karen Hækkerup (S), Morten Bødskov (S) and Brian Arthur Mikkelsen (K) held the office. It is not a political issue. It is about hounouring the law and not violating the fundamental rights. + answer: He is Minister of Justice. + explanation: | + Søren Pape is the relevant minister. Data retention was equally illegal when Søren Pind (V), Mette Frederiksen (S), Karen Hækkerup (S), Morten Bødskov (S) and Brian Arthur Mikkelsen (K) held the office. It is not a political issue. It is about honoring the law and not violating the fundamental rights. This case will, hopefully, change Danish politicians obvious and intentional violations of our human rights. - heading: Why not TDC? - content: | + answer: Pape wrote a letter telling them to surveil illegally. + explanation: | TDC claim ignorance of the law. With the letter from the minister, they argue that they lack the ability to understand the illegality of a ministerial order. It will be more difficult and more expensive to argue a case against the state of Denmark. But it will set the precedent for future governments wanting to oppress the fundamental rights of the people. - heading: Why should I care? If surveillance can hinder crime, I'm pro data retention! - content: | - Mass surveillance does not necessarily prevent or stop crime. It **can** lead to more arrests and fewer unsolved crimes, but mainly because innocent people will be punished. Having a database table of the location of unsolved crime and a database table of everybody's movements makes it possible to collate data and prove that everybody is guilty. + answer: It is a myth that data retention helps the police. + explanation: | + Mass surveillance does not necessarily prevent or stop crime. It **can** lead to more arrests and fewer unsolved crimes, but mainly because innocent people will be punished. Having a database table of the location of unsolved crimes and a database table of everybody's movements makes it possible to collate data and prove that everybody is guilty. Have you bought a crowbar recently or have you walked past a house that has been burgled? Mass surveillance requires you to [doublethink](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethink) to stay out of jail. - Honouring human rights does not leave the police blind as bats. Crime could be solved before 2006, but the police have to think for themselves. Who might be a suspect and why? It will still be possible to conduct surveillance, but only with sufficient democratic oversight. + Honoring human rights does not leave the police blind as bats. Crime could be solved before 2006, but the police have to think for themselves. Who might be a suspect and why? It will still be possible to conduct surveillance, but only with sufficient democratic oversight. - heading: Who's behind this? - content: | - Human rights jurist [Rasmus Malver](https://twitter.com/rasmusmalver) kickstarted the fundraising with a contribution of 30.000 DKK, and the second large donor is [Bitbureauet](https://bitbureauet.dk/). In January the movement gained traction and today 100s of people, businesses and organisation have donated. An organisation was created to hold the money, and it will all be used to pay the legal fees. + answer: Foreningen imod Ulovlig Logning (The Association Against Illegal Surveillance). + explanation: | + Human rights jurist [Rasmus Malver](https://twitter.com/rasmusmalver) kickstarted the fundraising with a contribution of 30.000 DKK, and the second large donor is [Bitbureauet](https://bitbureauet.dk/). In January the movement gained traction and today 100s of people, businesses and organization have donated. An organization was created to hold the money, and it will all be used to pay the legal fees. - We have chosen IT- og EU-specialists [Bird & Bird](https://www.twobirds.com), and advokat Martin von Haller leads the team. + We have chosen IT- and EU-specialists [Bird & Bird](https://www.twobirds.com), and lawyer Martin von Haller leads the team. - heading: What is the relationship to human rights? - content: | - Human rights are your rights againt governmental abuse. Some countries have human rights enshrined in their constitutions, but in Denmark they mainly exist in the form of the European Convention on Human Rights ([pdf](http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf)). It was written after the second world war to avoid history repeating, and over time it has been updated to protect minorities and to avoid the emerging terrors from states on both sides of the iron curtain. + answer: You have a right to privacy. + explanation: | + Human rights are your rights against governmental abuse. Some countries have human rights enshrined in their constitutions, but in Denmark, they mainly exist in the form of the European Convention on Human Rights ([pdf](http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf)). It was written after the second world war to avoid history repeating, and over time it has been updated to protect minorities and to avoid the emerging terrors from states on both sides of the iron curtain. - The people of the European Union has agreed upon an updated version of the convention in 2000, the EU Charter on Fundamental Rights ([pdf](http://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf)), where the protection of privacy is emphasised. + The people of the European Union has agreed upon an updated version of the convention in 2000, the EU Charter on Fundamental Rights ([pdf](http://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf)), where the protection of privacy is emphasized. The Danish mass surveillance and retention of metadata is an obvious violation of both conventions, and it has been established that both are important parts of Danish law. The current surveillance is more intrusive than the surveillance conducted by both Gestapo and STASI. You have the right not be the victim of this. - heading: Are you profiting from this? What will happen if there's too much money? - content: | - No. All of the funds will go to paying legal fees and the attorney, ([Bird & Bird](https://www.twobirds.com)). If there is “too much” money (unlikely), it will be forwarded to a similar case or organisation. + answer: No. And excess funding will be forwarded to a similar case or organization. + explanation: | + All of the funds will go to paying legal fees and the attorney, ([Bird & Bird](https://www.twobirds.com)). If we end up with excess money (unlikely), it will be forwarded to a similar case or organization. - heading: What is being retained about me? - content: | + answer: Among other things what phone you have, where you are and who you're communicating with. + explanation: | The location of your mobile phone at all times of every day. Who you communicate with and, to some degree, what you do online. You can ask your provider for a copy of the data. If they reply within a reasonable time, they are allowed to charge you up to 200 DKK for it. - - heading: The minister says he need time to replace the legislation. Isn't that ok? - content: | - No. When mass surveillance was brought in on EU level, politicians were told it violates human rights, and thus it would be illegal. When implemented in Denmark they were told the same. When the ministerial notice was issued they were told again. + - heading: The minister says he needs time to replace the legislation. Isn't that ok? + answer: No. + explanation: | + When mass surveillance was brought in on EU level, politicians were told it violates human rights, and thus it would be illegal. When implemented in Denmark they were told the same. When the ministerial notice was issued they were told again. A ministerial notice (bekendtgørelse) cannot exist without a legal basis in a law, and a law implementing EU regulation cannot exist when the regulation has been struck down. - The European Court of Justice was unusually clear when striking down the surveillance regulation in both the case of Digital Rights and Tele2/Watson. It did not come as a surprise to anybody, and obviously it withdrew any legal basis from the ministerial notice. + The European Court of Justice was unusually clear when striking down the surveillance regulation in both the case of Digital Rights and Tele2/Watson. It did not come as a surprise to anybody, and obviously, it withdrew any legal basis from the ministerial notice. - Justice minister Søren Pape Poulsen wants to continue surveillance, and is desperately looking for a way to sneak it through parliament. There is a large majority for doing it, but it would require Danish secession from the Council of Europe and potentially the European Union. Denmark would then stand with Belarus as one of only two European states not a party to the Convention on Human Rights. + Justice minister Søren Pape Poulsen wants to continue the surveillance and is desperately looking for a way to sneak it through parliament. There is a large majority for doing it, but it would require Danish secession from the Council of Europe and potentially the European Union. Denmark would then stand with Belarus as one of only two European states not a party to the Convention on Human Rights. - Metadata retention is a criminal act, and the minister is only kept out of jail by constitutional provision stating that only other politicians can bring him to justice. + Metadata retention is a criminal act, and the minister is only kept out of jail by a constitutional provision stating that only other politicians can bring him to justice. --- diff --git a/_scss/module/_qa.scss b/_scss/module/_qa.scss index ab5be36f..ebd31595 100644 --- a/_scss/module/_qa.scss +++ b/_scss/module/_qa.scss @@ -21,6 +21,12 @@ } .qa--answer { + h3 { + color: white; + margin-bottom: 1em; + -moz-osx-font-smoothing: grayscale; + } + p { max-width: 100%; &:last-of-type { @@ -49,6 +55,7 @@ .qa--answer { max-width: 40rem; + p { margin-bottom: 1em; &:last-of-type {