As a tool for direct and unfettered access to information and its transmission, the internet constitutes a cultural and political challenge to certain regimes. Accordingly, some states in the Middle East and elsewhere seek to restrict their citizens from using the internet in a free and comprehensive manner. According to “Journalists Without Borders”, five of the 15 countries defined as “internet enemies” are in the Middle East: Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Tunisia. And five of the 11 countries defined as “under surveillance” are also from the Middle East: Bahrain, Jordan, Libya, the UAE and Yemen.
The restrictions rely on a variety of means–technological, economic, religious and educational. Legislation regulates the management of the internet and limits its free usage by relying on steps ranging from restricting content to which access is permitted to meticulously monitoring every click by users and eliminating almost entirely every aspect of user freedom and anonymity.
Every relevant country has its objectives. The Iranian government is the most active in limiting free access. In February 2003, it established a committee to deal with internet violations. About a year later, the Ministry of Justice announced a draft law that punishes internet crimes; it establishes jail terms for publishing information detrimental to state security or false data regarding government officials. Internet providers would no longer be considered the exclusive authority for filtering content. In November 2006, the government required owners of websites to register them; two years later, the minister of culture and Islamic guidance announced that any local website not registered with his office would be closed.
Saudi Arabia began regulating the internet in 2001 and internet cafes in mid-2003. These decisions criminalized the publication of information injurious to Islam, the state and its officials and placed restrictions and obligations on internet providers, internet cafe operators and diverse users.
Tunisia was one of the first states to implement restrictions on the internet; it has the most detailed and restrictive legislation of all states in the region, dating back to March 1997. Turkey’s judicial system has blocked specific sites such as YouTube when they carried clips that insulted the father of the nation, Ataturk.
In Israel an effort is underway to legally restrict websites deemed “unsuitable to minors” due to violent or pornographic content and gambling. Legislation is also pending to regulate talkbacks and hold website owners responsible for content unless the identity of a writer is revealed.
Two primary factors are at work in motivating and modulating internet regulation in the Middle East: the degree of internet proliferation in each country and the country’s record regarding press freedom and democracy.
Obviously, to the extent that internet usage in a given country is low due to economic or technological reasons or because of the absence of the requisite human resources, there is no need to regulate the internet through legislation because there is no internet. Thus Yemen had only 1.4 percent internet penetration in 2008, followed by Libya (4.2), Sudan (8.7) and Algeria (10.4). Conversely, the Middle East countries with the most internet legislation and regulation are also the leaders in internet penetration: Israel (52 percent), UAE (49.8), Turkey (36.9), Iran (34.9), Kuwait (34.7), Tunisia (27), Saudi Arabia (22) and Egypt (12.9 percent).
Yet these figures alone do not explain why internet legislation is more developed and complex in countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran and Tunisia than in Turkey, the UAE, Kuwait and Israel, where internet penetration is even higher. The explanation lies in the fact that the former countries are also at the bottom of the list where press freedom and democracy are concerned, whereas the latter are at the top. In 2008, Israel was ranked 46 out of 173 countries in the degree of press freedom it permits and the UAE 61, whereas Iran was ranked 166, Saudi Arabia 161, Egypt 146, Tunisia 143 and Turkey 103. Similar rankings obtained with regard to democracy.
The content of websites affected by governmental blocking and censorship is also a function of a third factor: the nature and culture of a given country. In conservative countries with a deep link to tradition and religion, the emphasis will be placed on blocking pornography, violence, gambling and alternative religious tendencies as well as entertainment, music and health issues. Countries lacking regime legitimacy (e.g., Egypt and Syria) will block websites with alternative political leanings, ethnic minority and political opposition sites as well as human rights and social communication sites.
We can conclude that internet legislation in all its forms is an indicator of the degree of freedom in a country. The more freedom of information, communication and media in a country, along with personal freedoms and democracy, the less internet legislation and government interference in the lives of internet users, down to minimum necessary limitations such as initiatives to legislate controls on pornography sites. Finally, in those Middle East countries where internet penetration is low but so are levels of freedom of information and democracy, internet legislation can be expected to increase in parallel with greater exposure to the internet.- Published 26/2/2009 © bitterlemons-international.org
