Analysis 
Seizure of Indymedia Web Servers "an Act of Global Censorship"

By Alistair Coleman
Oct 14, 2004

Back to Alternative Reader Index     

The seizure of London-based web servers used by the anti-globalization news organisation Indymedia has drawn sharp criticism from media watchdogs and human rights groups. These groups view the use of far-reaching international treaties to close several web sites as a politically-motivated denial of free speech with global implications for the freedom of expression.

Servers operated by the US-owned company Rackspace were confiscated by British authorities from their offices in Uxbridge under a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT). FBI spokesman Joe Parris told the AFP news agency that although the bureau had requested a subpoena against Rackspace, the action was taken on behalf of two third party nations, later identified as Switzerland and Italy.

MLATs are powerful bilateral agreements between two countries which allow for far-reaching powers of police and judicial cooperation in the fields of international terrorism, kidnapping and money laundering.

Photographs

Indymedia themselves were initially at a loss as to why the MLAT court order was directed at them, as the court order prohibits Rackspace from commenting on the matter and divulging to whom the servers were actually given. A Rackspace spokesman said "Rackspace is acting as a good corporate citizen and is cooperating with international law enforcement authorities".

However, this is not Indymedia's first brush with the FBI, with the Bureau attempting to obtain Indymedia's IP logs in August 2004, while the activities of Indymedia affiliates Radio Free Santa Cruz and Cyprus IMCista also investigated by US authorities. It has since emerged that the order was the result of two separate enquiries into Indymedia by Switzerland and Italy.

According to AFP, the federal prosecutor of Bologna, Marina Plazzi, has stated that she is investigating Indymedia because "it may support terrorism"; while the Swiss investigation dates back to the 2003 G8 summit in Evian, where the organisation posted photographs where Swiss intelligence agents could be identified.

"Mud and poison"

The Milan-based Corriere della Sera suggests that the Italian request comes as a result of the Indymedia Italia site appearing to support insurgents involved in the deaths of Italian carabinieri in Al-Nasiriyah, southern Iraq, leading to National Party demands for the site's closure.

Leftist parties in Italy condemned the site's closure, calling it an "act of global censorship". Pietro Folena of the DS Party directly accused the government of a deliberate and "very serious" act of censorship with the Greens denouncing "the authoritarian calling of the Italian right".

In response, National Alliance spokesman Mario Landolfi told Corriere della Sera that closing the web site was "a good and proper thing" because "it was spitting out mud and poison, full of obscenities". Forza Italia's Francesco Giro said the closure was inevitable, due to Indymedia's "seriously defamatory tone", accusing the left of "shedding crocodile tears" over the matter.

"Abuse of powers"

The use of an MLAT order to seize the Rackspace servers has been criticized by press freedom organisations. Peter Bunyan, editor of Statewatch accused British Home Secretary David Blunkett of complicity in a politically-motivated action which would be unjustifiable under the terms of the treaty.

Media watchdog Reporters Without Borders (RSF) also adopted this theme, writing to Blunkett, condemning his actions and seeking an explanation for the confiscations. "Closure of web sites is a serious step," RSF said in its letter, "the reasons for which should definitely be made public".

The International Federation of Journalists was more forthright it its criticisms, accusing the authorities concerned of abusing their powers in an operation that was "more intimidation than crime-busting".

"We have witnessed an intolerable and intrusive international police operation against a network specializing in independent journalism," said IFJ General Secretary Aidan White.

"The seizing of computers and the high profile nature of this incident suggests that someone wanted to stifle these independent voices in journalism," said White in an IFJ press release, "We need a full investigation into why this action took place, who took part and who authorised it."

While most of Indymedia's affected sites are now operating on alternative systems, concerns remain over what appears to be the use of judicial means to silence relatively small dissident voices, fuelling speculation that other sites may be targeted. The internet and technology news site The Register comments: "And even if there were something far more serious involved than just a couple of photos, the procedure ought to send shivers down the spine of every publishing organisation on the Internet." From AxisofLogic.com

http://www.infoshop.org/inews/stories.php?story=04/10/13/1495350

Back to top

We want to know what you think of this article.