Digging Deep into Silent Internet Censorship in Peru
A new way of blocking websites without judicial orders quietly spreads
Twitter: @hiperderecho
Ver versión en español
GNI members work together to leverage each other’s unique expertise and perspectives to advance and protect freedom of expression and privacy in the ICT sector around the world. The six GNI-Internews Fellows have each designed a research project that draws on the unique affordances of this multistakeholder model of collaboration. By pursuing this research throughout their term, fellows apply their GNI participation directly to issues of importance to them.
Contemporary Peru is not a country one would think of when talking about authoritarian regimes or hostile environments for freedom of expression online in Latin America. But, due to the government’s overzealous exploitation of a regulatory loophole, Peru’s free and open Internet is increasingly under assault.
Like other countries in the region, only 60% of Peru’s 30 million citizens are connected to the Internet. Basic services and infrastructure are lacking in rural and underserved areas. And it’s also a country where drug trafficking, kidnapping, extortion and organized crime are still growing, often enabled by our weak institutional capacity.
In response to these challenges, Peru has pursued a “grab bag” of different efforts to curb bad behaviors through the use of technology under the premise of increasing security. Our country is home to some of the most intense versions of laws about biometric identification, SIM card registration, data retention, access to geolocation without judicial warrant, intelligence information collection, among others.
Last November, a controversial new mechanism for information control was implemented in Peru. In an effort to respond to unauthorized technologically-enabled transportation services in Lima, the Peruvian Government issued an Executive Decree to block at the national level any website or mobile application that could enable the provision of such services.
According to the brief regulation signed by the president on November 14, 2019 the Ministry of Transport and Communications was tasked with the role of identifying such online providers, assembling a list of them, and issuing blocking mandates to every telecommunications provider in Peru. The Internet companies, after receiving the orders, have less than 24 hours to comply with them or potentially face fines. Through this mechanism and without independent review, prior warning to the affected parties, or any other accountability measure, the Peruvian government is able to block anything on the Internet they believe is against this particular piece of legislation while avoiding public scrutiny.
In some countries, regulations like these would run against Network Neutrality protections that generally prohibit arbitrary interventions in the free flow of information on the Internet. In Peru, Network Neutrality regulations have been in place since 2007. They specifically say that “any blocking measure can be ordered only by a judge to be considered valid.” However, they also have a carve out that allows Internet service providers to block anything that an “express legal provision” orders. Lacking a clear or official interpretation of what this exception allows and what triggers it, this regulation was used by the government to justify website and app blocking.
This approach is beginning to spread. A proposal to introduce a similar exception in Mexico’s net neutrality regulation has alarmed local human rights activists, including GNI member R3D.
At Hiperderecho, Peru’s only digital rights organization since 2012, we were very alarmed by the wide reach of this new regulation. Although similar ideas were floated against online gambling or ride-hailing services, none of them ultimately were enacted nor were they so blatant in their disregard of due process safeguards.
Following a Freedom of Information request sent by our attorneys, we discovered that during the first few days of the new regulation the Ministry had already requested that 18 sites be blocked, including mobile applications, websites and even Facebook pages. Some of them included the Colombian ride hailing application Picap and Facebook groups where bike owners advertised their services. Due to the ongoing nature of this legal mechanism, there’s no updated and publicly available list of what is being blocked other than asking periodically for that information through such requests. Internet service providers are compelled by law to publish a list of such websites, under the Network Neutrality regulation from 2016, but there is little oversight of their compliance.
Less than a month after the regulation was published, Hiperderecho filed a constitutional claim against the regulation. We are asking the courts in Peru to declare this practice illegal. Similarly, we are asking the telecommunications regulator to intervene and determine whether or not telecommunications companies are complying with the network neutrality regulation when they obey these orders.
But there is still a lot of work to be done. Our biggest enemy is not this regulation or their proponents, but the idea that the government should be able to block whatever content they deem inappropriate on the Internet — an idea that has been surprisingly well-received in popular opinion. This belief is understandable, as everyday life online can be an endless showcase of hate, violence and aggression for many Peruvians, especially women and gender dissidents. But the need to more effectively prevent and mitigate harm online cannot drive us to short-sighted authoritarian solutions.
This year, along with our continuing litigation and advocacy on the subject, we are building a database of blocked websites in Peru. With the generous support of Internews and the Global Network Initiative through the GNI-Internews Fellowship, we will build an informational site about the current wave of websites and smartphone applications blocked in the country. We believe that clear and accessible information can help us bring this issue forward in the public agenda. Perhaps a public list of sites blocked can allow Peruvians to assess the impact of the regulation and ultimately everyone will be better positioned to form their own opinions on the subject.
