As Yahoo! executives came before the House Foreign Affairs Committee to clarify testimony about its role in the arrest of a Chinese journalist, U.S. Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) called on the executives to settle court cases with families of pro-democracy activists who have been jailed by the Chinese Government after Yahoo! turned over information on them.

    “Settling the case would be a good step forward. And you should settle with them generously in favor of the families. It can never make things whole, but it would be an important gesture. That would be one way that you could convey to the committee and the American people and especially the victims that there are true victims because of your complicity. You can settle that tomorrow or by the end of the week if you’d like to,” Smith told Yahoo! Chief Executive Officer Jerry Yang and Senior Vice President and General Counsel Michael Callahan.

    “We absolutely will consider that,” Callahan said in response.

    Callahan’s remarks came as the company took considerable heat from Committee members for their practices in China that have led to the arrests of Chinese pro-democracy activists and their misleading testimony about their actions in the case of incarcerated Chinese journalist Shi Tao at a hearing Smith convened in February 2006. 

    “Mr. Callahan now claims that when he testified in 2006 he did not have personal knowledge of the contents of the Chinese police request. But that he and the company he works for made a good-faith effort to inform themselves about the matter he was called to testify about,” said Smith, who joined with Chairman Tom Lantos (D-CA) to conduct the investigation into Yahoo!’s testimony. “Mr. Chairman, Yahoo!’s lawyers have told our staffs that almost a dozen people prepared Mr. Callahan for his testimony. How could a dozen lawyers prepare another lawyer to testify before Congress, without anyone thinking to look at the document that had caused the hearing to be called? This is astonishing.”

    Smith added, “It is even more incredible that Yahoo! claims that when, after his testimony before this committee, Mr. Callahan later found out that Yahoo! knew that the police request had to do with ‘state secrets,’ he forgot to inform the Committee.”

    In February 2006, Smith convened a landmark seven-hour hearing at which representatives from major tech Internet firms Microsoft, Google, Yahoo! and Cisco Systems testified under oath that they have complied with Chinese censorship laws and/or provided personally identifiable information about Internet users to repressive regimes in countries where they do business.

    It was during that hearing that Callahan—while under oath—alleged in his opening remarks that the company had no information about the nature of the investigation into Shi Tao, who was arrested by Chinese Police after Yahoo! turned over personally identifying information on him. Tao has since been sentenced to 10 years in prison for “divulging state secrets abroad.” The so-called “state secret” the Chinese Government accused Shi Tao of violating was to pass on a directive calling for censorship of news on the 15th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre.

    The Dui Hua Foundation, a leading organization promoting human rights in China, has since released a document detailing evidence that Yahoo! was told that the information requested related to an investigation into Tao for “illegal provision of state secrets to foreign entities.”

    “Everyone involved with China knows that when democracy and human rights activists, religious believers, and members of persecuted nationalities are arrested it is often for 'violating state secrets.'  It is the modus operandi of dictatorship. In effect, this charge means nothing more than that they told the truth about some misdeed of the Chinese government,” Smith said during the hearing.  (Read Smith's opening statement in its entirity here.) 

    Congress took a major step forward last week to prevent U.S. technology companies like Yahoo! from aiding regimes, like China, who restrict access to the Internet and use it to squash pro-democracy movements when the Foreign Affairs Committee unanimously passed legislation authored by Smith that would criminalize such activities.

    The Remedy

    Smith’s bill—the “Global Online Freedom Act of 2007” (H.R. 275)—will strengthen the federal government’s new strategy to promote online freedom by prohibiting U.S. Internet companies from cooperating with repressive regimes that restrict information about human rights and democracy on the Internet and use personally identifiable information to track down and punish democracy activists. The bill would make it a crime for Internet companies to turn over personal information to governments who use that information to suppress dissent.

    “Two weeks ago this Committee marked up and reported the Global Online Freedom Act, HR 275. I authored that legislation to prohibit exactly what Yahoo! did to Shi Tao,” Smith said during the hearing. “The Global Online Freedom Act would prohibit U.S. companies, like Yahoo!, from disclosing information identifying Internet users to officials of countries like China unless the Department of Justice determines it is for a legitimate law enforcement purpose.”

    Yang and Callahan both said the company is open to the goals of the legislation and credited Smith with prompting action within the industry in terms of their role in human rights abuses.

    “Congressman Smith deserves the credit for getting the industry to move on this issue. The entire human rights dialogue around the new framework started after the February 2006 testimony,” Callahan said. 

    Additionally, the “Global Online Freedom Act of 2007”:
 

• Creates a private right of action for individuals aggrieved by the disclosure of such personal identification to file suit in any US district court;
• Prohibits US internet service providers from blocking online content of US government or US-government financed sites;
• Establishes a new interagency office within the State Department charged with developing and implementing a global strategy to combat state-sponsored internet jamming by repressive countries;
• Requires the new Office of Global Internet Freedom to monitor filtered terms; and to work with Internet companies and the non-profit sector to develop a voluntary code of minimum corporate standards related to Internet freedom;
• Requires Internet companies to disclose to the new Office of Global Internet Freedom the terms they filter and the parameters they must meet in order to do business in Internet Restricting Countries;
• Requires the President to submit to Congress an annual report designating as an “Internet Restricting Country” any nation that systematically and substantially restrict internet freedom;
• Establishes civil penalties for businesses (up to $2 million) and individuals (up to $100,000) for violations of the new requirements;
• Mandates a government feasibility study to determine what type of restrictions and safeguards should be imposed on the export of computer equipment which could be used in an Internet Restricting Country to restrict Internet freedom.