The SUPREME court (the Supreme Court) had planned to judge at this week’s two cases on the legality of the court orders which require the blocking of the apps of the message. The analysis of the case has been postponed to next Wednesday (the 27th). The office of the Attorney General’s office if you spoke out against blocking WhatsApp in Brazil.
- The encryption is end-to-end Chat
- Why are all the chats in the Telegram, are not to be secret?
To file the suit and 403 (Argument From the non-compliance Of a Precept of the Fundamental) has been filed with the SUPREME federal court in rio in 2016, after a judge of the state to determine the blocking of WhatsApp across the country for at least 72 hours, and not to cooperate with an investigation into organised crime and drug trafficking. The company said that it could not pass on the content of your messages, because you don’t have access to it are protected by encryption end-to-end.
Lock WhatsApp infringes the freedom of communication
Augustus, the Altar, the attorney general of the Republic, the states, in the opinion of the SUPREME court, there are other ways to do Backups to comply with subpoenas, court orders including fines, and other punishments that “involve a sacrifice of the lower to the fundamental rights of the society.
It is understood that, in the case it involves a tension between fundamental rights: on the one hand, and the right to security of the public; on the other hand, the right to freedom of communication. The altar reminds us that WhatsApp has more than 2 billion users in more than 180 countries and, in Brazil, there are more than 120 million people. “When a court determines that the lock-out of this service, more than half of the population is affected by this,” he writes.
The attorney-general, the judicial decisions which have the effect of suspending nationally the WhatsApp is violating the fundamental freedoms of the media. The Constitution states that, “it is a free expression of thought, and anonymity is forbidden. the latter,” and that “it is the free expression of intellectual, artistic, scientific and communication, regardless of censorship or license”.
It reminds you of a decision made last year by the Constitutional Court of Turkey, which he felt was the block of the web site from Wikipedia is a violation of the right to freedom of expression. The same conclusion is to be reached by the Constitutional Law of Brazil, writes to the Altar.
Blocking WhatsApp is not proportional
The attorney general notes that, in order to restrict fundamental rights, a court order must meet at least these requirements:
- it is the right one? Yes, it has a legitimate purpose in accordance with the Constitution, the fundamental right to the security of the public;
- it needs to go? This is because there are other ways to achieve the goal with the same intensity, but it will be affected less with the freedom of the media (such as penalties and fines).
If the measure is not necessary, then it does not comply with the principle of proportionality, and should not be allowed to play.
“The brazilian laws and regulations may have the right to demand from the provider of the internet application, which stores and makes available to private communications on or through a court order,” says Aras. “However, this premise does not follow the conclusion that, in the event of non-compliance, judgments are entitled to suspend the application to use.”
The altar is also the fact that, within the limits of the action in the SUPREME court, the Public Prosecutor’s office and the Judicial branch could not point to how companies should design their products and services in order to be able to adapt to the brazilian legislation.
For this reason, he believes that it is not going into the details of the more technical: the action of the SUPREME court did not discuss whether the encryption is end-to-end that is compatible with the laws of the united states, for example.
“It is not a matter to ponder whether or not the deployment of the exploit (backdoor) is, as required, or if the public authorities have to adopt other methods of interception, such as the technique the man-in-the-middle (MITM),” said the attorney-general.
According to him, the question is simple: WhatsApp could be blocked in Brazil because it did not comply with an order of the court relating to the safety of the public? The PGR says it’s not. We will know in the next week, the SUPREME court will agree with this, if you do not encounter a new delay.