Le Courrier

sommaire

d'ici...

Opinion

Notre planete

Education

Droits humains

Cultures

Medias

Entretien

dossier
| The spy in your refrigerator… | …and the spy who loves us all | Japan: voyeuristic games | Data-swindlers: mining for gold in the badlands of e-commerce | The dot.bomb syndrome | The quiet revolution | Forsaking genetic secrets | A tireless troubleshooter | Labour pains: the birth of a movement | Shhh….they’re listening | Videomania in George Orwell’s homeland |
BSK, the provider that says niet
Anne Nivat, Moscow correspondent for the French daily Libération.
photo
© nail_m@bayard.ru
In the USSR, the state has always had its nose in citizens’ private business. Ten years after the fall of the Soviet empire, how closely are the Russians watched?
Of course, the communist party is no longer the almighty power it used to be. But old habits die hard. In 1998, the government decided to take a close interest in Russia’s three million Internet users. By passing a resolution setting up SORM 2, (an acronym for a system of operative investigation measures), the secret services and the State Telecommunications Committee extended SORM 1 to the Internet. Since 1995, that system has allowed the Federal Security Bureau, the KGB’s successor, to eavesdrop on traditional communications (telephones, telex, fax and so on), as long as it had a warrant.
So far, a single man has dared to challenge SORM 2. Naïl Murzakhanov, 34, is the chairman of Bayard-Slaviya Communications (BSK), an Internet access provider based in Volgograd (1,500 kilometres south of Moscow). “When the FSB agents came to have me sign their co-operation plan, I refused,” he says. “My team and I went through the document with a fine-toothed comb and we came to the conclusion that it was illegal.” Murzakhanov, who has a degree in robotics, explains that “we’re not against all forms of co-operation. We’d be willing to go along in specific cases, but not systematically. For example, if the FSB brought us court documents proving that an individual is suspected of tax evasion or pedophilia, we could cooperate. But that has never happened.”
Cut to the quick, the ministry of communications threatened to take away the rebellious provider’s license. But in January 2000, Murzakhanov sued. The court has met three times. Each time the session was adjourned because the ministry’s representatives failed to show up. The case dragged on. Then, in August, Murzakhanov received a letter from the minister himself, who withdrew his threat to take away BSK’s license. “There was no longer a need to maintain our lawsuit,” the young businessman says, frustrated at seeing the Russian government get off the hook so easily.

Top