Gordon Campbell on Kim Dotcom’s bail application 24 Jan 2012
- International crime cooperation laws report welcomed News
- Coast to Coast looms as most competitive in years Living
- Attempt to smash world record while suspended at 10,000 feet Living
- Aviation and maritime safety strengthened News
- Barfoot & Thompson joins ‘the team behind the team’ Business
- Gordon Campbell on US pressure to expand our role in Iraq News
- Chinese New Year celebration at Parliament News
- Mick Fleetwood Blues Announce New Zealand Tour Dates Living
- Hall of Fame the Highest Honou Living
- Patents Bill passes first reading News
The Crown is opposing bail for Megaupload CEO Kit Dotcom on the basis of (a) that he poses a flight risk and (b) he could recommence his operations if released. Neither seem to be very convincing arguments. By its very nature, the extradition battle is likely to be a lengthy one and if having money is held to be a decisive factor in being regarded as a flight risk, then bail would have to be denied to almost every white collar criminal who comes before the court.
Are the courts really prepared to keep Dotcom and his colleagues in custody for the entire extradition process? That would be a totally disproportionate infringement of the basic right of accused persons to liberty, until the charges against them are heard and proved. On balance, Dotcom poses neither a threat to society nor – given the presence here of his family, and his residency here – does he seem a likely flight risk.
Similarly, there seems little risk of Megaupload rising from the ashes of the FBI’s “Mega Conspiracy” any time soon. If bailed – and under supervision – Dotcom might even conceivably be able to help the authorities to untangle the entirely legal aspects of Megaupload’s operations, and help return that property to its lawful owners. These owners, as Russell Brown has pointed out, may include the likes of Kanye West, Will i am, Snoop Dogg and other less celebrated citizens whose lawful property will otherwise be frozen indefinitely in Megaupload’s cyberlocker until the charges against him and his colleagues are resolved.
As other commentators (including Salon’s Glen Greenwald) have also noted the FBI-led action against Megaupload was taken barely 24 hours after controversial two anti-piracy pieces of legislation ( the so called SOPA and PIPA bills) backed by entertainment industry lobbyists were withdrawn from the US Congress.
Critics insisted that these bills were dangerous because they empowered the U.S. Government, based on mere accusations of piracy and copyright infringement, to shut down websites without any real due process. But just as the celebrations began over the saving of Internet Freedom, something else happened: the U.S. Justice Department not only indicted the owners of one of the world’s largest websites, the file-sharing site Megaupload, but also seized and shut down that site, and also seized or froze millions of dollars of its assets — all based on the unproved accusations, set forth in an indictment, that the site deliberately aided copyright infringement.
In other words, many SOPA opponents were confused and even shocked when they learned that the very power they feared the most in that bill — the power of the U.S. Government to seize and shut down websites based solely on accusations, with no trial — is a power the U.S. Government already possesses and, obviously, is willing and able to exercise even against the world’s largest sites (they have this power thanks to the the 2008 PRO-IP Act pushed by the same industry servants in Congress behind SOPA as well as by forfeiture laws used to seize the property of accused-but-not-convicted drug dealers).
Julian Sanchez at the Cato Institute is also essential background reading on the Dotcom case and his concluding remarks are particularly interesting:
This is another reason the takedown-before-trial model is disturbing. Again, there’s strong evidence in the indictment that Megaupload’s conduct here was anything but innocent. But now imagine some other cloud storage site that comes under the crosshairs of the government or content industries. As I suggest above, they might have very good reason for only disabling specific, publicly distributed links to a copyrighted file in response to a takedown notice, rather than cutting off access to every user who has remotely stored the file, regardless of how they’re using it. At a trial, they’d get to explain that. If the site is shut down before its operators have an opportunity to even make the argument … well, that doesn’t bode well for investment in innovative cloud services.
So far, we have seen the New Zealand courts and Police acting in SWAT team-like helicopter raids that clearly show the Police have been consuming too many of the entertainment industry’s fine products, and colluding with the shutdown of this particular website. Megaupload appears to have been singled out partly for the flamboyance of its owners, which serves all the better to deter les autres such as Mediafire and yes, even Youtube itself – whose content remains an untidy mix of legally and illegally uploaded material.
When and if this case ever gets to a US court, Dotcom’s lawyers should have a fine old time arguing why their operation has been singled out for draconian action, when (apparently) the likes of Youtube are able to quietly devise revenue sharing ad content and other ruses that enable it to co-exist (albeit uneasily) with the same entertainment industry that is now baying for Dotcom’s blood. Our own courts should decline to be party to this particular lynch mob. Dotcom should be released on bail, to oppose the extradition, and ultimately if necessary, to prepare his defence against these charges.
As Glenn Greenwald says, this is what is called due process in the US. In times past, the US courts used to adhere to it. Not so much today. In a recent op ed in the Washington Post (headlined “10 Reasons The U.S. Is No Longer The Land of the Free”) law professor Jonathan Turley itemised the excesses of state power that the Bush and Obama administrations have created (and in some cases used) since 9/11.
These include: the assassination of US citizens, indefinite detention, arbitrary justice, warrantless searches, the use of secret evidence, war crimes and torture, the widespread monitoring and surveillance of ordinary citizens, the use of secret courts, immunity from judicial review and extraordinary renditions. Turley’s conclusions are worth reading:
An authoritarian nation is defined not just by the use of authoritarian powers, but by the ability to use them. If a president can take away your freedom or your life on his own authority, all rights become little more than a discretionary grant subject to executive will.
The framers lived under autocratic rule and understood this danger better than we do. James Madison famously warned that we needed a system that did not depend on the good intentions or motivations of our rulers: “If men were angels, no government would be necessary.”
Benjamin Franklin was more direct. In 1787, a Mrs. Powell confronted Franklin after the signing of the Constitution and asked, “Well, Doctor, what have we got — a republic or a monarchy?” His response was a bit chilling: “A republic, Madam, if you can keep it.”
Since 9/11, we have created the very government the framers feared: a government with sweeping and largely unchecked powers resting on the hope that they will be used wisely.
Frankly, the New Zealand courts should not be serving as a dutiful helpmate of such a system. Dotcom should be bailed.
5 Feb 2016 News
05 February 2016 Museum of Waitangi set to become a national and visitor Icon The new Museum of Waitangi, opened today by the... more
5 Feb 2016 Business News
Article - BusinessDesk NZ wool prices slip on higher kiwi dollar, reduced demand from China By Tina Morrison Feb. 5 ... more
5 Feb 2016 Business News
Article - BusinessDesk NZ directors more aware of risk, focus on cyber security Feb. 5 (BusinessDesk) - Directors of... more
5 Feb 2016 Lifestyle
4 February 2016What it is to be a Kiwi may depend of where you live – Auckland or elsewhere in New Zealand – with... more
4 Feb 2016 Property
Auckland's house sales volumes jump to 8-year high in January, Barfoot says Feb. 4 (BusinessDesk) - Auckland residential... more
5 Feb 2016 Migration
This Waitangi Day, New Zealand will roll out the welcome mat to 24 new citizens at Government House, and acknowledge over... more
21 Dec 2015 Migration
Article - Businesswire NZ net migrants reach all-time high 63,700 in boom November year for travel By Jonathan Underhill Dec. ... more
22 Jan 2016 Travel & Tourism
New Zealand Government Hon Nicky WagnerMinister of Customs 22 January 2016 More than 100,000 SmartGate users in one week Customs ... more
21 Jan 2016 Travel & Tourism
Wellington ratepayers to pay $8mln over 10 years for Canberra flights Jan. 21 (BusinessDesk) - Wellington City Council is... more
5 Feb 2016 Multisport
70 teams from 11 nations will come together in Kaiteriteri, Tasman this April for the fifth chapter of New Zealand’s premier ... more
22 Jan 2016 Opinion
We seem to be living in an era of virtual government, where governments promote only an illusion of policy kapow! rather than the... more
24 Dec 2015 Opinion
Column - Gordon Campbell Gordon Campbell on the Dotcom extradition decision Inevitably – and with justification –... more
5 Feb 2016 Appointments
New Zealand Government Hon Christopher Finlayson5 February 2016 GCSB Chief Legal Advisor Lisa Fong will become the Acting Director... more
22 Jan 2016 Flying Kiwi*
Warren and Mahoney Heading to Europe And the Olympics of Architecture Architectural graduate Antonia Lapwood has been awarded the... more
11 Dec 2015 Recruitment
11 December 2015 Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment Steven Joyce and Minister for Social... more
4 Dec 2015 Recruitment
New Zealand Government Hon Steven Joyce Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment 4 December 2015 Tertiary Education,... more