Przejdź do głównej zawartości


EU member states can now collect and share information on so-called “potential terrorists”.

But who is classified as a "potential terrorist?

A "shared understanding" was reached this year without democratic scrutiny. This left broad criteria for deciding who is a "potential terrorist or violent extremist threat".

The definition includes individuals categorised as:
• refugees and asylum seekers
• climate and environmental activists

in reply to Statewatch

These diverse groups are recognised as having a "limited" number involved in terrorism and violence, yet they are all subject to surveillance under this broad "shared understanding".

The UN Special Rapporteur on Environmental Defenders under the Aarhus Convention issued a warning that this could "increase polarisation by wrongly labelling activists as radicals and trivialising terrorism.”

https://www.statewatch.org/news/2024/october/eu-definition-of-potential-terrorists-opens-door-to-broad-information-sharing/

reshared this

in reply to Statewatch

we *are* terrorists. We are acting against the state to protect ourselves and our planet. While yes, this is a terrible thing, it is not unexpected given amount of repression both communities are facing. Fortress Europe will protect itself at any cost. Thank you for your tireless work shining a light on it.
in reply to Statewatch

As ever with anything like this, the vague language used (ie “potential” for extremism/ radicalisation) completely leaves the door for “mission creep” by authorities in operational delivery!!

As we’ve seen in the UK, the vague language used in several of our recent anti-terror legislation is increasingly being exploited by our security forces to target civic-rights activists and pro-Palestine/ anti-genocide independent journalists!

#Press #PressFreedom #Journalism #FreeSpeech

in reply to Statewatch

There is a collective, also present here on fedi, providing knowledge and tools against surveillance - anybody remembers their address?
in reply to Statewatch

Words have meanings. Government language abuse = government propaganda, which should be outlawed. Governments misapplying the "terrorism" label is a better example of terrorism than protesters inconveniencing people.