3 ms·
""What you’ve found goes beyond that: it suggests that even foreigners are subjected to such mass, and unlawful surveillance."" Pretty bold for them to call it
by phy6 7y ago
""What you’ve found goes beyond that: it suggests that even foreigners are subjected to such mass, and unlawful surveillance."" Pretty bold for them to call it unlawful in two places when it was not shown to be against that country's laws. Distasteful, yes. Unlawful? Hard to tell from just this article. Personally, I'm more worried about exported android devices.
- Tepix 7y agoChina signed the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This action almost certainly violates some of these rights (articles 18-21 come to mind: Articles 18–21 sanctioned the so-called "constitutional liberties", and with spiritual, public, and political freedoms, such as freedom of thought, opinion, religion and conscience, word, and peaceful association of the individual.)
- Leary 7y agoWhen did China (PRC) sign the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights? Are you talking about the Republic of China?
- thecount122195 7y agoThey must be because the Chinese civil war was still ongoing when the declaration of human rights was voted on in 1948, and the PRC wasn't even seated in the UN until 1971.
- skissane 7y agoThe Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is not a treaty, it is a General Assembly resolution – as such, countries don't "sign it", and it isn't legally binding. As well as the UDHR, we also have international human rights treaties such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). As a treaty, it is binding on those countries which have ratified or acceded to it (signature alone does not legally bind one to a treaty, it merely expresses an intention to ratify it in the future.) On that point, it is worth noting that PRC signed the ICCPR in 1998, but as yet has not ratified it, so is not legally bound to it. (Previously, in 1967, ROC signed it, but never ratified it either; PRC's position is that ROC's 1967 signature was legally void, hence their own signature in 1998.) (Technically speaking, an unratified signatory, while not bound to the terms of the treaty itself, is obliged under Article 18 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) to "refrain from acts which would defeat the object and purpose of a treaty" – but it is difficult to see how that article could be applicable to the case of China and the ICCPR.)
- Tepix 7y agoThey didn't sign it but they voted in favor of it.
- johnzim 7y agoIndeed. For something to be unlawful you must have a society beholden to the rule of law, which the PRC is most definitely not.
- iiuuhhggff 7y agoAren’t all cops, when operating in an official capacity, above the law?
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]