The Papua New Guinea government has admitted to using a technology that it says was “successfully tested” to block social media platforms, particularly Facebook, for much of the day yesterday.

Police Minister Peter Tsiamalili Jr said the “test” was done under the framework of the Anti-Terrorism Act 2024, and sought to address the growing concerns over hate speech, misinformation, and other harmful content online.

Tsiamalili did not specify what kind of tech was used, but said it was carried out in collaboration with the Royal Papua New Guinea Constabulary (RPNGC), the National Information and Communications Technology Authority (NICTA), and various internet service providers.

“We are not attempting to suppress free speech or restrict our citizens from expressing their viewpoints,” Tsiamalili said.

“However, the unchecked proliferation of fake news, hate speech, pornography, child exploitation, and incitement to violence on platforms such as Facebook is unacceptable.

“These challenges increasingly threaten the safety, dignity, and well-being of our populace.”

However, government agencies responsible for communications and ICT, including NICTA, said they were not aware.

‘Confidence relies on transparency’
“Public confidence in our digital governance relies on transparency and consistency in how we approach online regulation,” NICTA chief executive Kilakupa Gulo-Vui said.

“It is essential that all key stakeholders, including NICTA, law enforcement, telecommunications providers, and government agencies, collaborate closely to ensure that any actions taken are well-understood and properly executed.”

He said that while maintaining national security was a priority, the balance between safety and digital freedom must be carefully managed.

Gulo-Vui said NICTA would be addressing this matter with the Minister for ICT to ensure NICTA’s role continued to align with the government’s broader policy objectives, while fostering a cohesive and united approach to digital regulation.

The Department of Information Communication and Technology (DICT) Secretary, Steven Matainaho, also stated his department was not aware of the test but added that the police have powers under the new domestic terrorism laws.

Papua New Guinea’s recently introduced anti-terror laws are aimed at curbing both internal and external security threats.

Critics warn of dictatorial control
However, critics of the move say the test borders on dictatorial control.

An observer of Monday’s events, Lucas Kiap, said the goal of combating hate speech and exploitation was commendable, but the approach risks paving way for authoritarian overreach.

“Where is PNG headed? If the government continues down this path, it risks trading democracy for control,” he said.

Many social media users, however, appeared to outdo the government, with many downloading and sharing Virtual Area Network (VPN) apps and continuing to post on Facebook.

“Hello from Poland,” one user said.

East Sepik Governor Allan Bird said today that the country’s anti-terrorism law could target anyone because “the definition of a terrorist is left to the Police Minister to decide”.

‘Designed to take away our freedoms’
“During the debate on the anti-terrorism bill in Parliament, I pointed out that the law was too broad and it could be used against innocent people,” he wrote on Facebook.

He said government MPs laughed at him and used their numbers to pass the bill.

“Yesterday, the Police Minister used the Anti-terrorism Act to shut down Facebook. That was just a test, that was step one,” Governor Bird said.

“There is no limit to the powers the Minister of Police can exercise under this new law. It is draconian law designed to take away our freedoms.

“We are now heading into dangerous territory and everyone is powerless to stop this tyranny,” he added.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Meta, the giant social media corporation, has “unpublished” Green Left’s longstanding Facebook page, which had tens of thousands of followers.

We had been regularly posting stories, videos and photographs on the page from our consistent reporting of the news and views that seldom get into the mainstream media.

But our recent interviews with veteran Palestinian freedom fighter Leila Khaled have resulted in what appears to be a 10-year ban, imposed without warning, nor an avenue of appeal.

Khaled, 79, is a member of the Palestinian Council (Palestine’s parliament) and a member of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. She lives in political exile in Jordan.

She is recognised as the Che Guevara of Palestine; she has enormous respect from Palestinians and millions of progressive people around the world.

The Facebook banning came shortly after Zionist organisations combined with right-wing media (SkyNews and the Murdoch media) to pressure Labor to say it would prevent Khaled from addressing Ecosocialism 2024 — a conference GL is co-hosting in Boorloo/Perth in June — by not only denying her a visa, but even banning her from speaking by video link.

Multiple visits
As GL reported, the excuse for such political censorship is, as the Executive Council of Australian Jewry alleged in its letter to Labor, that allowing Khaled to speak “would be likely to have the effect of inciting, promoting or advocating terrorism”.

This is nonsense.

Khaled has visited Britain on multiple occasions over the past few years. Israel issued her a visa to visit the West Bank in 1996.

She has visited Sweden and South Africa and, on one of her multiple visits, met Nelson Mandela (once also labelled a “terrorist” by the West), who warmly welcomed her.

A growing number of human rights activists, academics, journalists and community leaders have protested against this blatant political censorship. Their statements are here and we urge you to join in by sending us a short statement.

Khaled told GL the real reason for this censorship is to “make us shut up about what Israel is doing in Gaza and the West Bank today”.

Meta has been exposed for carrying out “systematic online censorship”, particularly of Palestinian voices.

Suppression of content
In December 2023, Human Rights Watch (HRW) documented “over 1050 takedowns and other suppression of content on Instagram and Facebook that had been posted by Palestinians and their supporters, including about human rights abuses”.

Meta did not apply the same censorship to pro-Zionist posts that incited hate and violence against Palestinians.

HRW noted that “of the 1050 cases reviewed for this report, 1049 involved peaceful content in support of Palestine that was censored or otherwise unduly suppressed, while one case involved removal of content in support of Israel”.

Other studies have described the systematic “shadow banning” of pro-Palestinian posts on Facebook and Instagram.

AccessNow, which defends the “digital rights of people and communities at risk” reports that Meta is “systematically silencing the voices of both Palestinians and those advocating for Palestinians’ rights” through arbitrary content removals, suspension of prominent Palestinian and Palestine-related accounts, restrictions on pro-Palestinian users and content, shadow-banning, discriminatory content moderation policies, inconsistent and discriminatory rule enforcement.

Social media corporations, such as Meta and Elon Musk’s X (formerly Twitter), exercise a lot of power to manipulate people’s social and political views. This power has grown exponentially as more people access their news, views and information online.

Break this power
The search for ways to break this power will go on.

In the meantime there is one way readers can break the social media bans and restrictions on GL’s voice-for-the-resistance journalism: become a supporter and get GL delivered to you.

It has always been a struggle to keep people-power media projects alive. But GL has been going since 1991 and, with your help, we will not let the giant social media corporations silence us.

Republished with permission from Green Left.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Just the other day a robot guard came along a corridor in a special digital prison, consulted his flatscreen embedded on its wrist and then pressed his thumb on a door, which sprang open.

For the fourth time, I was being released from Facebook prison having served a term of imprisonment imposed upon me by Great Algorithm Machine which we lags shorten to GAM.

Self-sustaining and completely devoid of any human intervention, GAM has deemed me to be a serial hate speech offender. I am absolutely not, but my protests were not only pointless, there was no one listening or reading them.

Again, with no human hand involved at any point, I was hauled off to solitary inside the Mark Zuckerberg Institution for Global Speech Control.

Now, living in Aotearoa and having our Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern create the Paris Call, a powerful new weapon to end online hate speech, it is my patriotic duty to support it.

But lately I have become collateral damage to her Paris Call, and a nagging thought is growing that there may be many other casualties too. Stopping the nutters, the terrorists, the bad guys might additionally include GAM wiping out any one expressing any kind of opinion.

Especially opinions that a human reader — rather than a machine — would immediately recognise as arguments opposed to opinions advanced by bad guys.

Silence save the banal
Algorithms will silence all, except the banal, the bland, the boring and the pointless.

As GAM will run all my words through its system, I am going to avoid using the commonly accepted abbreviation for the National Socialist German Workers Party. Nor will I mention its leader; that’s a fast ticket back to a Menlo Park prison.

After some trepidation, I present a summary of my rap sheet:

October 11, 2021: I made a small posting based on a clipping from New Zealand Paper’s Past, a significant historical online collection of the nation’s newspapers. I posted a little story from the Bay of Plenty Times in 1941 which reported that people in Fiji, Tonga and Samoa were raising money to buy Spitfires in order to defeat the previously mentioned German Workers Party and its leader. I was prevented from any posting or commenting for three weeks.

February 18, 2022: As an anti-covid “freedom convoy” rattled around the country, I posted a meme showing the Workers Party leader in front of the Eiffel Tower, saying he was on a freedom convoy. Locked up again.

May 26, 2022: I posted a link to US CBS News on some new arms non-control measure and commented: “The continued stupidity of (Redacted, insert nationality of a people between Canada and Mexico) bewilders the world.” This got me a big “Hate Speech” stamp, a ban and a declaration that my future posts would be lower in people’s news feeds.

September 13, 2022: I asked why accused woman beater Meli Banimarama and convicted killer Francis Kean were using the “ratu” title. Banned again.

No human review
It was immediately apparent from the formatted notice issue to me, that while GAM had processed the thing, no human in Facebook had. Generously they tell the victim that there is a review system and to fill out a submission.

Dutifully, this gullible fellow did, pressed send and got an instant message back from GAM which said, in effect, that due to covid there were no available humans to read my submission. So, the sentence, imposed entirely by machine, stands every time.

It doesn’t matter what you say; no one is listening.

Facebook’s GAM is lying at this point: Covid has nothing to do with the removal of their humans. They are deliberately sacking them, due to Wall Street demands for more profit.

At one stage I discovered email addresses for assorted Facebook functionaries in Australia and New Zealand. That did no good. They ignored me, if they even existed.

Despite all this, I have been something of a Facebook fan. With Sue Ahearn, I co-manage The Pacific Newsroom with its 60,000 plus followers. The fact that I was in the digital slammer meant that group did not get serviced in the way they normally would.

Facebook plainly does not care.

My worry now is what is all this doing to free speech. At first blush, yes it’s a good idea that something like Mein Kampf cannot be trotted out on Facebook. But wouldn’t it be a good idea for some one or ten to read it and warn us all of what is in it?

Digital trip wires
Currently GAM is looking you up, digitally speaking if certain trip wires are touched in the algorithm.

Paris Call’s GAM model has no space, or ability, to deal with satire, cynicism or sarcasm. Many would say that is, of course, a good thing. Ban them. But they have long been part of human discourse, indeed vital.

And it will silence Paper’s Past! A national treasure now defined by GAM as a gathering of hate speech.

What else do we have to give up to keep evil from exploiting public conversation?

How will we learn the new rules, other than with a spell in the digital penitentiary? Perhaps there will soon be an app, in which The Machine checks each sentence, prior to use, for social acceptability.

Is social media creating a world in which speech can only be made, after The Machine has deemed it acceptable?

Michael Field is an independent journalist and author, and co-manager of The Pacific Newsroom. This article is republished with his permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Censoring of Facebook in Papua New Guinea can be addressed by three mandated government agencies, says Chief Censor Jim Abani.

He was responding to the Post-Courier on how his office was dealing with indecent content posted on Facebook in view of a controversy over a video of an alleged child molester.

“FB censoring is to be addressed by three agencies with relevant responsibilities that are mandated to carry out policies and regulations,” Abani said.

He added: “In the event that pictures and sexual references and connotations are published then the censor will say its objectionable publication.”

Abani said the Cyber Crime Code Act defined penalties for cyber harassment and cyber bullying.

“NICTA (National Information and Communications Technology Authority) may look into electronic devices used to commit crime or offence while Censorship Office will vet or screen the content of materials and determine whether it’s explicit, or not explicit and allowed for public consumption.”

He said police under the Summary Offences Act are equally responsible to censor illicit material posted online.

“Indecent publication published is in the amended Summary Offences Act.”

No comment on specific case
Abani could not comment on the specific video of the alleged 16-year-old child molester, saying that his officers were still working on gathering information.

However, he added that the approved 2021-2025 National Censorship Policy called for partnership and a collaborative approach from each responsible agency.

Abani said a new trend in the digital space had meant the Censorship Office to build its capacity to monitor and control apart from developing the recently launched policy it had been currently doing by reviewing the Censorship Act 1989.

The office was also working on signing an agreement with an internet gateway service provider.

Phoebe Gwangilo is a PNG Post-Courier reporter. Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The troubled nation of Solomon Islands, whose Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare won a no-confidence vote 32 votes to 15 with two abstentions on Monday, has been downgraded from “open” to “narrow” in the people power under attack 2021 CIVICUS Monitor report.

While the majority of Pacific countries were rated open, of most concern was the increased use of restrictive laws that blighted the whole region the report released by the international non-profit organisation CIVICUS, a global research collaboration that rates and tracks rights in 197 countries and territories.

The People Power Under Attack 2021 report shows that civic freedoms are routinely respected in over half the countries in this region. Seven countries in the Pacific are rated “open”, the highest rating awarded by the CIVICUS Monitor.

An open rating means people are free to form associations, demonstrate in public spaces, and share information without fear of reprisals.

Concern in the report highlighted those civic rights are not respected across the region; Fiji, Nauru and Papua New Guinea remain in the “obstructed” category, meaning that restrictions of freedoms of expression, association and assembly have been raised by civil society in these countries.

Restrictions relating to media freedoms, access to information and the right to protest led to the Solomon Islands downgrade. Freedom of expression is of particular concern — in early 2021 the cabinet threatened to ban Facebook over worries about posts with “inflammatory critiques of the government”.

The government eventually backtracked after condemnation from civil society and the opposition.

Public Emergency extended
Freedom of assembly have been documented in the Solomon Islands. In July, the State of Public Emergency was extended for another four months in response to covid-19, even though there were only 20 reported cases in the country.

A march in Honiara to deliver a petition to the government by people from the Malaita province was disrupted and dispersed by the police.

Accessing information is not available to the media in the pandemic as Solomon Islands does not have freedom of information legislation. Additionally, the environment towards civil society groups is becoming more hostile in the country.

For example, in late 2019 the office of the Prime Minister called for an investigation into a number of civil society groups after they called for the prime minister to step down.

“Excessive restrictions on civic freedoms imposed by the government under the guise of preventing covid-19 led to the downgrade of the Solomon Islands. Constant threats to ban Facebook and attempts to vilify civil society have also resulted in the failure of the Solomon Islands to retain a top spot in our global rights rankings,” said Josef Benedict, Asia-Pacific civic space researcher at CIVICUS.

The use of excessive restrictions against activists and critics was the leading violation in 2021 with at least seven countries having been found to have transgressed in the report.

Target on Fiji journalists, activists and critics
In Fiji, provisions relating to sedition in the Public Order (Amendment) Act 2014 have been used to target journalists, activists, and government critics, while other sections of the act have been used to arbitrarily restrict peaceful protests.

The Fiji Trade Unions Congress (FTUC) was denied a permit to hold a rally in Suva, on International Labour Day, 1 May 2021 — no reason, written or verbal for the rejection was given.

The use of restrictive laws is a concern across the Pacific. New criminal defamation laws passed in Vanuatu and Tonga cast a chilling blow to freedom of expression.

In Australia, the government continues to hound whistleblowers through the courts, as seen in the case of Bernard Collaery, the lawyer of an ex-spy, who was charged with allegedly exposing Australia’s bugging of Timor-Leste.

In 2019, Australia was downgraded by the CIVICUS Monitor due to attempts to silence whistleblowers who reveal government wrongdoing, among other concerns.

New Zealand and Australia, which was downgraded in 2019, did not get off scot-free. The UN Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association said the pandemic was not reason enough to quell peaceful assembly of protesters.

Indeed, protesters to the lockdown rules were detained this year for violating covid-19 rules.

Intimidation of Pacific activists
Other civic rights violations highlighted by the CIVICUS Monitor include the harassment or intimidation of activists and critics across the Pacific, as documented in Fiji, Samoa and Papua New Guinea.

Fijian surgeon Dr Jone Hawea was detained for questioning after criticising the government’s response to covid-19 in his Facebook live videos, while Papua New Guinean lawyer Laken Lepatu Aigilo was allegedly detained and assaulted by police in April 2021 after lodging an official complaint against a politician.

“The state of civic space in the Pacific may seem relatively positive. However, over the year we have seen restrictive laws being used in several countries, including criminal defamation laws. Protests have also been denied or disrupted under the pretext of handling the pandemic, while activists have faced harassment and intimidation,” said Benedict.

However, there have been some positive developments this year. After strong civil society pressure, Tongan authorities moved swiftly to charge the alleged murderer of leading LGBTQI+ activist Polikalepo “Poli” Kefu, after his body was found on a beach near Tongatapu, Tonga’s main island

More than 20 organisations collaborate on the CIVICUS Monitor to provide an evidence base for action to improve civic space on all continents.

The Monitor has posted more than 500 civic space updates in the last year, which are analysed in People Power Under Attack 2020.

Civic space in 196 countries is categorised as either closed, repressed, obstructed, narrowed or open, based on a methodology which combines several sources of data on the freedoms of association, peaceful assembly and expression.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Solomon Islands Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare insists his government will push on with the temporary suspension of Facebook while lawmakers explore ways to regulate social media.

In a statement in Parliament today, a fired-up Sogavare did not hide his government’s desire to suspend Facebook.

He said since that the announcement on social media of the suspension of Facebook, users had continue to use the social media platform “irresponsibly”.

Sogarave said he wanted laws in place to hold those responsible for violations to be held accountable.

“This goes to show that Facebook needs to be suspended so that relevant regulations can be brought to Parliament to regulate the use,” he said.

Sogavare told Parliament that his cabinet had agreed to suspend Facebook on November 12.

On the timing of the suspension, Sogavare said it would depend on the work.

Once “all arrangements are done before we move in to temporarily suspend it.” he said.

“Once we have regulations in place we will open it back.”

Robert Iroga is editor and publisher of Solomon Business Magazine. Articles are republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Struggling businesses have expressed concerns and international media rights groups have condemned the Solomon Islands government’s proposal to temporarily ban Facebook.

The Solomon Islands Chamber of Commerce and Industry (SICCI), as the peak body representing private sector in Solomon Islands, is particularly concerned with the negative impacts this decision will have on the country’s micro businesses, entrepreneurs and those in the informal sector dependent on social media for marketing and advertising.

“It is the government’s prerogative to make such a decision, but as a chamber we believe that there are other pressing issues that require our collective focus,” SICCI board chair Jay Bartlett said.

Members of the business community shared their concerns with SICCI today while others opposed the decision to temporarily ban Facebook.

Paula Brake, managing director of Tower Insurance Pacific said Facebook was the most widely used social media platform in the Pacific Islands and was an important communication tool relied upon by individuals, businesses and communities.

“Tower uses Facebook to engage with customers and their communities regarding a variety of matters, most importantly those relating to the preparation for and response to severe weather events.

“The most engagement Tower has on Facebook is relating to claims processing following major events. As such, Tower strongly opposes any proposal to ban Facebook usage in the Solomon Islands,” Brake said.

Important marketing strategy
Seventy percent of SICCI’s membership was made up of small medium enterprises (SMEs), one of them SAMEDIA Limited and director Gloria Hong said that for small businesses interacting with consumers on social media was an important marketing strategy.

“Using social media helps us to build brand awareness, increase our customer base, and connect with customers,” she said.

“In my view, banning Facebook is a threat to businesses, especially the small businesses [that] cannot afford to run advertisements on radio, newspapers and on TV,” Hong said.

Tongs Corporation have invested a lot of time and effort to launch and grow their Facebook presence as a mode of communication with their customers.

Sales and marketing manager John Wopereis said Facebook had been an effective tool in building relationships with the wider community to grow product knowledge and showcase the inspiring stories of builders, contractors and homeowners.

“In terms of our planning for 2021 onwards, it’s important for us to be clear on what to expect as we have outlined facebook as a key marketing tool and have content lined up ready to go. We need to know what’s happening so we can be clear on where to invest our time and effort,” Wopereis said.

As with the covid-19 global pandemic, the tourism sector would be most affected by the Facebook ban.

Heavily reliant on Facebook
Sunset Lodge based on the island of Savo relies heavily on social media to attract customers.

Owner Bernard Kemakeza has taken every opportunity presented by the government and SICCI to improve his business’ online presence and sees this move as a setback.

“Coming into 2020 we did not anticipate the global pandemic impacting on the tourism industry the way that we’re experiencing at the moment,” he said.

“For small operators such as ourselves, we are struggling to pay our workers, to pay tax to government, help our nearby communities and we look forward to when things get back to normal.”

Anthony Fargas, managing director of Coral Sea Resort and Casino, said advertising in the traditional media was not viable in a depressed economic landscape on a regular basis.

“There is a high uptake of Facebook with Solomon Islanders and freedom of expression and information should be encouraged in any democracy or competitive landscape.”

Unjustified media freedom attack
Responding to the Facebook ban plan, the Auckland-based Pacific Media Centre condemned the move, saying that it was an unjustified attack on media freedom and freedom of information.

“This is a cynical assault on fundamental human rights launched by ministers with thin skins and bruised egos and it is naive to claim that while Facebook would be banned media freedom would be retained,” said centre director Professor David Robie.

“Many small Pacific media, including in Solomon Islands, have integrated social media and news publishing platforms and strategies. An arbitrary ban on Facebook – even short-term – would be damaging to both the public right to know and the media business models putting at risk their viability.”

Amnesty International’s Pacific researcher Kate Schuetze said: “To ban a social media site simply because people are posting comments that the authorities don’t like is a blatant and brazen attack on human rights.

“Protecting the sensitivities of government officials is not a justifiable reason to limit freedom of expression, which is also a right under the Constitution of the Solomon Islands.”

Robert Iroga is editor of Solomon Business Magazine (SBM). This article is published with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The Pacific Media Centre has protested to Facebook over censorship of a West Papuan media freedom news item in what its director, Professor David Robie, has described as an Orwellian example of the “tyranny of algorithms”.

The news item, published by the International Federation of Journalists on its Asia-Pacific website, reported the content of the latest edition of Pacific Journalism Review, saying that it “highlights the growing need to address media freedom in the region, particularly in Vanuatu, Fiji, Papua New Guinea and West Papua”.

IFJ added a rider saying it was “concerned about the ongoing media repression and urges governments across the region to uphold journalist rights”.

READ MORE: The Ben Bohane photo that Facebook censored on an article about Indonesia

Dr Robie attempted to share this item with several Facebook media groups, including The Pacific Newsroom with about 9000 followers, but each time immediately received a blocking message from Facebook declaring:

“Your post goes against our community standards on nudity or sexual activity.

“Only people who manage Pacific Media Centre can see this post. We have standards because some audiences are sensitive to different things when it comes to nudity.”

The algorithm-dictated objection to “nudity” apparently was because IFJ had published a photo from last year’s “Papua Uprising” in the Melanesian provinces of Papua and West Papua in response to a racist attack on students in the central Java city of Surabaya. Two of the male protesters were partly naked according to Papuan highlands tradition.

Orwellian action
In a message to the Paris-based Reporters Without Borders media freedom advocacy watchdog, Dr Robie said the Facebook action was Orwellian and an example of the random “tyranny of algorithms”.

“Anybody with common sense would see that the photograph in question was not ’nudity’ in the community standards sense of Facebook’s guidelines.

“This was a media freedom item and the news agency picture shows a student protest against racism in Jayapura on August 19, 2019. Two apparently naked men are wearing traditional koteka (penis gourds) as normally worn in the Papuan highlands.

“It is a strong cultural protest against Indonesian repression and crackdowns on media. Clearly the Facebook algorithms are arbitrary and lacking in cultural balance.”

Dr Robie attempted three times to file a challenge over this “arbitrary” decision on August 7, but received no reply and his Facebook page still carries a standards breach “warning” that will remain in force “for a year”.

“This is absurd. The challenge process is a farce – merely a button with no field to enter specific reasons,” he told Pacific Media Watch.

“All I got was an automated message saying that ‘we usually offer the chance to request a review, and follow up if we got decisions wrong’. However, it added that ‘we have fewer reviewers available right now because of the coronavirus (covid-19) outbreak’.”

It was bizarre in that the original IFJ item on Facebook was apparently not blocked, just the PMC shared versions, he said.

Another censored photo
In April 2018, Facebook censored a West Papua photo by Vanuatu-based photographer Ben Bohane that also showed traditional koteka.

In response to this latest example of “community” censorship, Bohane wrote on social media: “Facebook happily keeps taking Indonesian money for disinformation ads on West Papua, so no surprises they try to block legitimate news and photos from there…”

Nick Chesterfield of West Papua Media said this incident came just months after Facebook was “skull dragged into removing thousands of Indonesian intelligence agency bot accounts that were used for trolling, harassing and threatening journalists and human rights defenders, and posting fake news”.

He accused the Facebook team of “once again using their opaque, toxic and racist ‘community standards’ censorship machine” to support the Indonesian occupation of West Papua.

The Pacific Media Centre has protested to the Facebook policy director for Australia and New Zealand, Mia Garlick, but at the time of publication had yet to receive a reply.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

By RNZ Pacific

Tonga is mulling a Facebook ban as the Kingdom struggles to contain a torrent of online abuse and threats on the platform directed at the monarchy by pro-government forces.

It’s the latest fallout in an escalating digital war between the pro-democracy camp and those firmly backing Tonga’s constitutional monarchy, which bestows the King with key political assets.

A new set of proposed laws which will remove some of the King’s powers and place them in the government’s hands has drawn ire from the royals’ camp, spilling onto combative Facebook pages.

READ MORE: USP hosts talks on social media and fake news in Pacific

Observers say both sides have mobilised thousands of mostly anonymous Facebook accounts to launch attacks on opponents and push political messaging.

Tensions escalated this month when a number of violent threats were made toward the King and his daughter, prompting Police Minister Mateni Tapueluelu to tell the state broadcaster he was considering blocking Facebook to quell the unrest. Prime Minister ‘Akilisi Pohiva later confirmed a working group had been given two weeks to find a solution.

“It’s not an attack on Facebook or media, but it’s just that they (government) have come to realise that we cannot hold fake identity responsible, there’s no law applied to this kind of platform,” said internet provider Tonga Cable director Paula Piukala in an interview.

The state-owned company is part of the multi-agency working group set up by the government in response to the Facebook abuse.

“We can’t control the world of the demons,” Mr Piukala said.

In Tonga, the Pacific’s last monarchy, criticism of the royal family is shunned publicly but has long been lobbed behind closed doors.

Still, experts said critics and online trolls have recently been emboldened by Facebook-enabled anonymity and an increasingly polarised political environment.

It comes as the government attempts to push through six controversial bills, which would edge Tonga closer toward a fully-fledged democracy, undermining a centuries-old grip by the kingdom’s monarchs. A bid earlier this year to rush the laws into force was stymied and they are still before parliament.

Since then, an online battleground has emerged between democracy supporters and those of the monarchy.

In his interview with the Tonga Broadcasting Commission on August 7, Tapueluelu said it was disappointing Facebook had been used to attack the King and royal family.

But missing from his comments was that his wife, who is the Prime Minister’s daughter, had been accused online as having set up a popular pro-democracy page just days before.

Tapueluelu and his wife have denied the allegations and the page has since been shut down.

“The politicians, government included, they see Facebook as a means to basically advance their thinking, their political campaigns,” said Kalafi Moala, a veteran Tongan journalist.

He said the government was losing its online war against the monarchy and had moved to shut down Facebook in a desperate attempt to save face.

“It’s almost like a drowning man trying to reach out for whatever it is that they need to do to kind of save the day for them.

“If they banned Facebook, something very, very drastic is going to happen in this country,” Moala said, adding that protests would likely follow the move.

In January, Tonga limited access to Facebook – which has around 62,000 users in Tonga – when it lost most of its internet access for 12-days due to a cable break. Businesses found their online operations restricted and residents were unable to reach their families in other countries.

Jope Tarai, an academic who researches social media at the University of the South Pacific in Fiji, said Tonga’s proposed ban was an overreaction.

“It would be very heavy handed if the rest of the majority of active account users in Tonga would have to pay the price for a group that is been accused of being a fake Facebook group,” he said, in reference to the pro-democracy Facebook page which was taken down.

Tonga is the latest in a string of Pacific governments to threaten to ban Facebook over online abuse levied at leaders.

In the past year, Papua New Guinea and Samoa have mooted shutting the platform down, although nothing has been actioned.

Tonga’s working group is also considering asking Facebook to install backdoors on local servers so the government can monitor accounts, said Tonga Cable’s Piukala. The suggestion is unlikely to carry much sway with the social media giant, which has been tightening privacy measures in response to global scrutiny.

“People will be free to write whatever they think and want, but be responsible,” Piukala said.

• This article is published under the Pacific Media Centre’s content partnership with Radio New Zealand

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz