Law can’t be scrapped for fear of misuse: SC on Aadhaar petitions

Brian Sanchez

‘Information is power and if power is given to state, it will use it like never before,’ said lawyer Kapil Sibal for the petitioners.

New Delhi: West Bengal on Tuesday used PrimeMinister Narendra Modi’s speech at Davos that one who controls data would control the world to assail in the Supreme Court the ambitious Aadhaar scheme, saying the Centre would control personal information of citizens to have a grip over them.

The Mamta Banerjee government was putting forth its arguments before a five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra which is hearing a clutch of pleas challenging the constitutional validity of the Aadhaar scheme and the enabling 2016 law.

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the West Bengal government, referred to parts of Modi’s recent speech at the World Economic Forum at Davos.

“Whoever controls data is the most powerful and can shape the world,” Sibal said quoting the prime minister.

Using the statement to buttress his submissions against the Aadhaar scheme, Sibal said it meant that “who controls data in India will control India” and the state will use the power like “never before”.

He told the bench, also comprising justices A K Sikri, A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud and Ashok Bhushan, that Aadhaar was nothing but the Right to Information of the State and the question was can it be held as constitutional. 

Also read: Sparks fly in Supreme Court over Aadhaar

“The answer is ‘no’,” Sibal added.

He said that it was the most important case to be decided by the apex court since independence and it was not the issue as to how much money the government was going to save, rather, the key point was whether citizens can be deprived of their fundamentals rights including the right to have choices.

“Digital world is far more susceptible to manipulations than the physical world,” he said, adding “no legislation can or should allow an individual’s personal data to put at risk”.

Sibal further said that no technology was safe and moreover, no assurance can be given that personal data of citizens would remain safe in digital space.

“Biometric, core biometric and demographic information of an individual is irretrievable once it becomes part of the digital world,” he said, adding that such information if put in digital domain, were like “genie which is out of the bottle” and can never be put back.

He said that the digital world was a vehicle to benefit “information economy” and the present move of the government in the form of Aadhaar would create an architecture of “an informational polity having “far-reaching consequences impacting most of the personal rights which are constitutionally protected”.

Also read: Nothing wrong insistence of Aadhaar for availing social security benefits: SC

Referring to provisions on deactivation of Aadhaar, Sibal said, “what kind of power is this? This is the power to cause civil and digital death (of a person).”

He gave an example of a woman being denied widow pension on the ground that she does not have Aadhaar and said, “I am entitled for widow’s pension because of my status and my entitlement has noting to do with my identity.”

The bench said the constitutionality of a law has to be judged on generality of cases and not on exceptional cases.

“How does the court decide what level of risk is proper or not? Should the court get into this or should it be left to the legislature,” the bench asked.

Sibal would resume his submissions on Wednesday.

Earlier in the day, senior advocate Shyam Divan, who appeared for those opposed to Aadhaar scheme, referred to a report on deaths caused due to starvation in Jharkhand as the ration cards of the victims were not linked with Aadhaar and said that the issue pertained to exclusion, death and dignity.

These reports were about “extreme situations” and in a democracy, there has to be an element of choice and Aadhaar should not be imposed, he said, adding there were other ways to weed out leakages in welfare schemes.

Also read: Make Aadhaar simple for vulnerable sections

Divan said persons, who cannot authenticate identities under the scheme, are often treated as “ghosts” and this cannot be tested on the parameters of fundamental rights.

He said once an individual is enrolled, he is not allowed an opt-out and a person should be given a right to opt out, if he finds out that his biometric data is being misused.

“Many people, who now wants to opt-out had said that there was no genuine informed consent at the time of enrolmentor they were not even aware that there is need for consent..,” he said.

Citizens’ data have been made available to private firms for commercial purpose and architectural design of UIDAI was such that it has very little control over this, he said, adding that there is no fiduciary relationship between the individual and the person collecting the data.

The bench took an example of credit card fraud and wanted to know whether this can be possible with Aadhaar.

It is possible to hack into these systems, which are not as secure as the central depository, Divan responded.

“Some of these leaks can be plugged but the basic architectural design of UIDAI is faulty and biometric data is easily compromisable,” he said.

Referring to an RTI reply, Divan said that enrolment of 6.23 crore people for Aadhaar was rejected because of duplicates as the UIDAI system works on probabilistic system.

Divan concluded his submissions and said the State may say that “I will choose to recognise you only in this manner, otherwise you cease to exist? The body cannot be used as a marker for every service”.

The apex court had on December 15 last year extended till March 31 the deadline for mandatory linking of Aadhaar with various services and welfare schemes of all ministries and departments of the Centre, states and Union territories.

Go to Source

Foxx: Berrios shouldn’t use special state’s attorney to fight ethics law

Brian Sanchez

Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx is clashing with Assessor Joseph Berrios over his use of a special state’s attorney to challenge the constitutionality of a county ordinance that limits campaign contributions.

Foxx has endorsed allowing a special state’s attorney, Kevin Forde, to defend Berrios as the county Board of Ethics seeks to fine the assessor $41,000 for accepting excess contributions from tax appeals lawyers. Forde, a private attorney, plans to ask the ethics board to reconsider the fines.

But when Forde also filed a lawsuit on Berrios’ behalf that challenges the county’s contribution limits, the action went beyond the parameters of Forde’s assignment, according to court papers filed Feb. 1 by Assistant State’s Attorney Paul Fangman.

The lawsuit was only “nominally brought” by Berrios in his official role as assessor, Foxx argued in her petition, saying the “true plaintiff” in the suit is Berrios as a political candidate.

Go to Source

Czech ruling party aims to keep Czexit out of debate on referendum law

Brian Sanchez

World

Czech parties launched talks on Tuesday on a law making it easier to call national referendums, presenting a tricky balancing act for the ruling ANO party as it seeks support for a new government while preventing an unthinkable Czexit vote.

FILE PHOTO – The leader of ANO party Andrej Babis speaks to the media at Prague Castle after a meeting with President Milos Zeman in Prague, Czech Republic November 28, 2017. REUTERS/David W Cerny


Bookmark

PRAGUE: Czech parties launched talks on Tuesday on a law making it easier to call national referendums, presenting a tricky balancing act for the ruling ANO party as it seeks support for a new government while preventing an unthinkable Czexit vote.

Since Britain voted in 2016 to exit the European Union, European officials have been determined to avoid more anti-EU votes elsewhere, including the Czech Republic, one of the bloc’s most eurosceptic countries according to polls.

Governments in Prague have been largely cool to deeper EU integration and the bloc’s migration policies, although membership has not yet come into question.

But with ANO, the party of billionaire businessman Andrej Babis, struggling to win backing to form a government despite being the runaway winner in an election last October, the issue of referendum rules has gained steam, pushed by anti-EU parties signalling a willingness to support an ANO government.

Most other parties have so far shunned Babis due to pending police allegations that he illegally hid ownership of a farm and convention centre a decade ago to get a 2 million euro (£1.7 million) subsidy involving EU funds. Babis denies wrongdoing.

ANO has given backing to the referendum initiative but does not want it to cover foreign policy issues like EU membership.

“We maintain our position that the subject of a referendum should not be exiting the EU,” ANO Senator Helena Valkova said after talks.

ANO is meeting the far-right, anti-EU SPD party, the far-left Communists, and the protest Pirates party on the referendum legislation, which would need three-fifths support in the lower house and backing in the Senate that is not certain.

Talks will continue next week and face questions over what turnout would be needed to validate a referendum and how many signatures are needed to initiate a vote.

SPD leader Tomio Okamura, who has pushed referendum legislation, said the question of EU membership was an obstacle in talks but there was a willingness to move forward.

President Milos Zeman, who has courted stronger ties with Russia and China, has also backed referendum legislation and holding a vote on EU membership, but says he would vote to stay in the bloc.

While ANO took a tough line against Brussels before the election, Babis – the country’s second richest person whose firms have also benefited from EU development funds – has praised the EU’s role as guarantor of a peaceful Europe and calls himself a pro-European politician.

ANO won 78 of 200 seats in the house in the last election, more than three times as many as its nearest challenger, with the rest of the seats divided among eight other groups.

Mainstream parties reject a government led by Babis while he faces police allegations. His party has held talks about getting support for a single-party government from the SPD and Communists. Some ANO members are against relying on the SPD for government support.

ANO also wants talks with its former ruling partners the Social Democrats but is waiting until new leadership of the party is elected at a convention later this month.

(Reporting by Jason Hovet and Jan Lopatka; Editing by Peter Graff)

Go to Source

There oughtta be a law, and California has 100s of new ones

Brian Sanchez



You mean there are more new state laws taking effect this month than the one legalizing pot, which California has spent the last half-century putting hundreds of thousands of its citizens in the slammer for?

Yes, Virginia, there are more. Over 100 more. Perhaps none as sexy — or maybe that’s stoner-y — as the one that rescinds century-old prohibitions on cannabis, allowing sale and possession for recreational use of up to one ounce of the formerly noxious weed.

But in the end is the result of the positive vote for Proposition 64 back in 2016 going to make California that much different? Our state has had legalized medical marijuana for two decades, and all your nieces and nephews — and perhaps you as well — have a physician’s card to treat your many ailments.

Some of the new laws are efficacious, insofar as it is possible for any new regulation to do good in this world. Some, not so much. And, no, we did not get our long-held wish that for every new one passed by the Legislature, two old laws — or let’s call it three — are done away with. So maybe that could be a New Year’s resolution for the esteemed members of what the late Texas columnist Molly Ivins used to refer to as the Leg — pronounced “Ledge,” as in teetering on the brink of. Get rid of the ones that are old and in the way before passing any more.

In the real world, the new California laws for 2018 run the gamut, from merely making technically legal things Californians are already doing to razzing Washington, D.C. with a Bronx cheer to actually making major changes in the way things are done in the state.

In the first category, count being allowed to cross the street when that red hand signal is flashing. Assembly Bill 390 takes away the former penalty for entering a crosswalk after a “Don’t Walk” symbol appears. Except that you need to live in a fancy community in which there is a countdown showing how much time is left for pedestrians to cross.

In the razzing-the-feds category, we would include Senate Bill 54, making California a “sanctuary state” for immigrants without papers. It’s a slap at President Donald Trump’s threat to ramp up federal deporting of undocumented immigrants by limiting the ability of local and state police officers to cooperate with ICE and other federal officials. Many of our state’s cities already limit such cooperation.

And the minimum wage is going up again, by 50 cents, to $11 per hour for workers at companies with at least 26 employees, and to $10.50 for smaller firms. The law could backfire, limiting job creation, the last thing California needs.

Advertisement

Assembly Bill 19 is the first step to a “free college” program waiving the first year of fees for any first-time student who enrolls full-time in community college. There’s a catch: The state has yet to provide enough money in its 2018-19 budget to cover the waivers.

Some laws just appropriately keep up with the times. Senate Bill 179 removes requirements that transgender Californians undergo treatment before applying to change the gender on their birth certificate. It also adds a “nonbinary” option for those who do not identify as either male or female, available on driver’s licenses as well starting in 2019. Never say you don’t live in a state at the cutting edge of the whole … thing.

Southern California News Group

Go to Source

‘People are not wanting to go to work.’ ICE checks at Central Valley firms spread fear

Brian Sanchez

At least 40 workers at Bee Sweet Citrus in Fowler lost their jobs after federal immigration agents began checking employee records last week, searching for people who are not legally allowed to work in the United States.

The enforcement action is part of an ongoing effort by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency to make sure employers aren’t knowingly hiring someone who is undocumented.

James Schwab, ICE spokesman, said the work site enforcement is nothing new and remains a priority of special agents with Homeland Security Investigations to ensure employers are in compliance with the law.

In recent weeks, ICE agents have paid visits to employers from Southern California to the Bay Area, sending a strong message to employers and workers to beware. Last month, ICE agents arrested 21 workers as part of a nationwide sweep of nearly 100 7-Eleven stores.

The ICE visits, known as employer audits, have just began in the central San Joaquin Valley and many expect them to continue.

Manuel Cunha, president of the Nisei Farmers League, a Fresno-based agriculture advocacy group, estimates that about eight employers have been visited by ICE agents.

“This is no joke,” Cunha said. “This is really happening and it is hurting our communities.”

BIZ CEK ORANGE CROP OUTLOOK4

A worker sorts through navel oranges at Bee Sweet Citrus in Fowler.

CRAIG KOHLRUSS Fresno Bee file

As part of ICE’s tactics, they give an employer 72 hours notice before they will come to check employee verification records, known as an I-9 forms. The form is used to verify the identity and legal authorization of the employee.

Jim Marderosion, president of Bee Sweet Citrus, said his workers were aware the ICE agents were coming and that was enough for some employees not to return to work. He lost 40 workers out of nearly 500.

“One woman who has worked for me for nearly 20 years came up to me, gave me a hug and told me that she had to leave; she couldn’t take a chance,” Marderosian said. “I got emotional because this is a very difficult thing for families.”

This is the second time Marderosian has lost workers because of an ICE audit. In 2013, he had to let go of 150 workers. As a longtime farmer and packing house owner, Marderosian is frustrated at the current situation.

For decades, industries like agriculture, construction and manufacturing have depended on immigrant workers, many who are undocumented. But attempts at immigration reform have failed or stalled in Congress.

Related stories from Modesto Bee

“What good does it do to make these workers lose their jobs,” Marderosian said. “They will have to find work somewhere. Some way or another they are going to have to feed their families.”

Leticia Valencia, a community organizer with Faith in the Valley, said the ICE visits have many undocumented workers concerned.

“People are not wanting to go to work,” she said, “because they are afraid that they many not come home to their families.”

Go to Source

Mergers position top firms for M&A

Brian Sanchez

Northern Colorado and Boulder Valley law firms are merging with other firms and acquiring partners with specialized knowledge in mergers and acquisitions to handle the same type of transactions.

Businesses focused on technology, oil and gas, natural foods and other key industries are engaged in buyouts and mergers — and seek local law firms to handle their transactions. The merger market is becoming increasingly attractive to law firms seeking to help their business clients.

In the latest move, Ballard Spahr merged with Lindquist & Vennum on Jan. 1 to expand the firm’s mergers and acquisitions expertise. The combined firm, which retains the name Ballard Spahr LLP and is based in Philadelphia with offices in Denver and Boulder, now will have more than 650 lawyers in 15 offices nationwide, including a presence in Minneapolis and Sioux Falls, S.D., and an expanded office in Denver.

In September, Ballard Spahr merged with Levine Sullivan Koch & Schulz, a First Amendment and boutique media law firm with a Denver office. Both provide media law services, and Ballard Spahr’s Denver office also offers corporate, litigation, public finance, and labor and employment services.

Lindquist & Vennum’s focus is corporate mergers and acquisitions, bankruptcy and litigation.

“Clients often require services and specialties other than corporate law. One law firm can provide a full scope of services,” said Steven Suflas, managing partner of the Denver office. “From Ballard Spahr’s perspective, the Lindquist & Vennum merger offered us a couple of attractive opportunities. In particular, the Minneapolis office’s practice was mergers and acquisitions for private equity clients.”

The merger between Ballard Spahr and Lindquist & Vennum expands what both firms can offer, said Ted Hartl, a partner in the bankruptcy group for Lindquist & Vennum and now a partner with Ballard Spahr. Lindquist & Vennum focuses on representing companies that want to restructure or sell their assets or acquire additional assets, he said.

“The marriage and merger makes a lot of sense,” Hartl said. “They get more work for the existing lawyers, instead of the client shopping elsewhere to get their needs met and goals achieved.”

Lindquist & Vennum provides Ballard Spahr with an opportunity to expand its bankruptcy representation, Hartl said.

“Ballard Spahr is historically a business-focused law firm,” Hartl said. “Denver is an insular market. To have one-stop shopping at Ballard Spahr for any corporation or business, whether they’re doing a merger and acquisition deal, a dispute that involves litigation or whether they have a bankruptcy problem or a labor dispute, any of those services, Ballard Spahr has the lawyers that can address the clients’ needs.”

The merger of Ballard Spahr with Levine Sullivan Koch & Schulz increased the capabilities of both firms, said Steve Zansberg, partner with Ballard Spahr and formerly with Levine Sullivan.

“By joining Ballard Spahr, our media clients have access to a broader range of services our family of litigators was unable to offer,” Zansberg said. “It’s created synergies within the firm to be able to collaborate with colleagues in other cities and to be able to offer services to media and emerging media clients that we could not offer.”

In two years, Ballard Spahr has made four major acquisitions, including opening an office in Boulder by acquiring Gross Cutler Seiler Dupont LLC in fall 2016 and Denver-based Donelson Barry Stross LLC in spring 2016. Both firms are focused on mergers and acquisitions.

Ballard Spahr’s acquisitions added a total of 16 lawyers to the Denver and Boulder markets, Suflas said.

The firm’s activities follow a trend among law firms over the last 25 years to expand in geographic scope and specialty, Suflas said. In the past, law firms were regionally based and served their local areas, he said.

“Law firms are not immune to that larger economic trend,” Suflas said. “Given the strong client relations in one area of specialty, their clients would be interested in using Ballard Spahr for other specialties. It’s the full scope of legal work. … Because the economy is good and interest rates are low, we’re seeing a good deal of corporate work.”

The trend for law firms to increase their mergers and acquisitions activity is market-driven, said Clay Bartlett, an attorney and partner with Coan Payton & Payne in Fort Collins, a law firm with offices also in Greeley and Denver and 24 attorneys.

“Our and other firms are responding to an increase in merger and acquisition transactions in the market. It’s been a trend we saw start in the last year and a half and still seems to be increasing,” Bartlett said.

Bartlett identified local economic recovery as one reason with sellers wanting to cash in on higher prices and buyers more willing to take risks, he said. Following the downturn starting in 2007, sellers did not sell for a five-year period because their properties were devalued, resulting in a “built-up supply of companies coming to market,” he said.

“We were ready to go and saw this ahead of time,” Bartlett said. “We’ve been working on an increased number of merger and acquisition transactions over the last couple of years. …When the general economy is strong, you see more merger and acquisition transactions. When the economy is weak, you see it slide. …  In good times, there are more deals, and in bad times there seem to be fewer.”

Other reasons for merger and acquisition activity include owner retirements, entering a new business venture, buying out competitors for more market share and expanding into the supply chain, Bartlett said.

“Instead of paying somebody else to fulfill a part of the supply chain, you can hopefully do it cheaper to increase your profit margin and capitalize on economies of scale,” Bartlett said.



 

Go to Source

Neota Logic Named Legal AI Leader by National Law Journal

Brian Sanchez

AI firm announces that it was named to the National Law Journal‘s inaugural list of Legal AI Leaders.

NEW YORK (PRWEB) February 05, 2018

Neota Logic announced that it was named to the National Law Journal‘s inaugural list of Legal AI Leaders. The company’s AI-driven platform for intelligent automation of expertise, documents, and business processes was recognized for its ability to scale expertise and enable law firms and their clients, corporate counsel and compliance leaders, to do “more for less.”

Business users can build powerful apps, without programmers, to deliver just-in-time guidance on legal, regulatory, and policy questions, to manage workflows, and to draft transactional and other documents. Neota Logic 9, just announced last week, extends the platform to no-code data management and analysis. “Advanced technology is essential in modern legal services,” said Michael Mills, Co-founder and Chief Strategy Officer of Neota Logic. “What the machines can do, lawyers should not. What the machines can do is growing at an impressive pace. We are pleased to be recognized by the National Law Journal along with other Legal AI leaders.”

About Neota Logic

Neota Logic delivers artificial intelligence software that makes doing business easier. Our AI software platform and reasoning engine enable our clients to automate their expertise intelligently at internet scale through applications accessible 24/7, and to improve business decisions while reducing risks and costs. For more information, visit http://www.neotalogic.com.

Press Contact

Catherine Ostheimer

SVP, Marketing & Communications

60 East 42nd Street, Suite 1810, New York, NY 10165

ostheimer(at)neotalogic(dot)com

646.762.7308

For the original version on PRWeb visit: http://www.prweb.com/releases/2018/02/prweb15169636.htm


Go to Source

Seattle finds Facebook in violation of city campaign finance law in net political ad regulatory first

Brian Sanchez

SAN FRANCISCO – Reuters

Seattle’s election authority said on Monday that Facebook Inc. is in violation of a city law that requires disclosure of who buys election ads, the first attempt of its kind to regulate U.S. political ads on the internet.

Facebook must disclose details about spending in last year’s Seattle city elections or face penalties, Wayne Barnett, executive director of the Seattle Ethics and Elections Commission, said in a statement.

The penalties could be up to $5,000 per advertising buy, Barnett said, adding that he would discuss next steps this week with Seattle’s city attorney.

A Facebook representative could not immediately be reached for comment.

The unregulated nature of U.S. online political ads drew attention last year after Facebook said Russian agents using fake names bought ads on the social network to try to sway voters ahead of the 2016 presidential election. Moscow denies trying to meddle in the election.

Buying online election ads requires little more than a credit card. Federal law does not currently force online ad sellers such as Facebook or Alphabet Inc.’s Google and YouTube to disclose the identity of the buyers.

Legislation is pending to extend federal rules governing political advertising on television and radio to also cover internet ads, and tech firms have announced plans to voluntarily disclose some data.

Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg said in September that his company would “create a new standard for transparency in online political ads.”

At the center of the Seattle dispute is a 1977 law that requires companies that sell election advertising, such as radio stations, to maintain public books showing the names of who bought ads, the payments and the “exact nature and extent of the advertising services rendered.”

The law went unenforced against tech companies until a local newspaper, The Stranger published a story in December in the wake of the Russia allegations asking why.

Seattle then sent letters to Facebook and Google asking them to provide data. The sides have been in talks, and last month Facebook employees met in person with commission staff.

“We gave Facebook ample time to comply with the law,” Barnett said. The social network provided the commission a two-page spreadsheet that he said “doesn’t come close to meeting their public obligation.”

Google has asked for more time to comply, and that request is pending, Barnett said.

Legal experts said they were unaware of any similar regulation attempts by other U.S. localities or states.

“Given the negative publicity around Facebook’s failure to provide adequate transparency in the 2016 elections, I would be surprised if they tried to challenge this law,” said Brendan Fischer of the Campaign Legal Center, a nonprofit that favors campaign finance regulation.

Go to Source

Law Society plays down significance of British solicitors seeking to practise here

Brian Sanchez

The Law Society of Ireland’s director general Ken Murphy has played down the significance of a number of British solicitors taking out licences allowing them to practise law in the Republic since the UK’s Brexit vote.

The UK’s decision in June 2016 to leave the EU prompted speculation that a large numbers of professionals such as lawyers would decamp from London to other centres, including Dublin, to continue serving clients that remain in the bloc.

However, while more than 1,300 British lawyers had signed up on the Irish Roll of Solicitors by November 2017, only about one-fifth of that number had taken out practising certificates entitling them to sell legal services in the Republic.

Figures published in the Law Society Gazette show that London firm Freshfield Bruckhaus Deringer accounted for 86 of those who have taken out practising certificates, which was the largest number. Hogan Lovells followed with 22 and Pinsent Masons was third with 16.

Open an office

Mr Murphy pointed out that of all the firms that have taken out certificates, just Pinsent Masons is planning to open an office in the Republic. He said the firm had intended doing this long before the Brexit vote.

The gazette’s numbers cover 16 UK firms where three or more solicitors have taken out the certificates, not those with one or two.

The total number of lawyers working for those firms that now have the certificates is 182.

Mr Murphy explained that most British solicitors seeking entry to the Irish roll are doing so to protect their status as EU lawyers.

“Their future-status concerns relate to such issues as rights of audience in the EU courts and, in particular, the entitlement of their clients to legal privilege in EU investigations,” he said.

Biggest practice

Meanwhile, A&L Goodbody has emerged as the Republic’s biggest law practice with 293 solicitors.

It added 18 solicitors with practising certificates to its payroll in 2017, leaving rival Arthur Cox, with which it has shared the top spot for the past few years, in second place.

Arthur Cox actually cut its number of practitioners by one to 274. Matheson was number three with 268 solicitors. McCann Fitzgerald, William Fry and Mason Hayes Curran filled the next three places.

Philip Lee was among the fastest-growing firms, adding six solicitors last year to grow its numbers to 44, moving up two places to number 18.

The number of practising certificates that the Law Society issued last year grew 363 to 10,098, an increase of 3.5 per cent. Mr Murphy noted that this increase was in line with economic growth.

Go to Source

Seattle finds Facebook in violation of city campaign finance law

Brian Sanchez

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) – Seattle’s election authority said on Monday that Facebook Inc is in violation of a city law that requires disclosure of who buys election ads, the first attempt of its kind to regulate U.S. political ads on the internet.

Facebook must disclose details about spending in last year’s Seattle city elections or face penalties, Wayne Barnett, executive director of the Seattle Ethics and Elections Commission, said in a statement.

The penalties could be up to $5,000 per advertising buy, Barnett said, adding that he would discuss next steps this week with Seattle’s city attorney.

It was not immediately clear how Facebook would respond if penalized. Facebook said in a statement it had sent the commission some data.

“Facebook is a strong supporter of transparency in political advertising. In response to a request from the Seattle Ethics and Elections Commission we were able to provide relevant information,” said Will Castleberry, a Facebook vice president.

Barnett said Facebook’s response “doesn’t come close to meeting their public obligation.” The company provided partial spending numbers, but not copies of ads or data about whom they targeted.

The unregulated nature of U.S. online political ads drew attention last year after Facebook said Russians using fake names bought ads on the social network to try to sway voters ahead of the 2016 presidential election. Moscow denies trying to meddle in the election.

Buying online election ads requires little more than a credit card. Federal law does not currently force online ad sellers such as Facebook or Alphabet Inc’s Google and YouTube to disclose the identity of the buyers.

Legislation is pending to extend federal rules governing political advertising on television and radio to also cover internet ads, and tech firms have announced plans to voluntarily disclose some data.

Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg said in September that his company would “create a new standard for transparency in online political ads.”

At the center of the Seattle dispute is a 1977 law that requires companies that sell election advertising, such as radio stations, to maintain public books showing the names of who bought ads, the payments and the “exact nature and extent of the advertising services rendered.”

The law went unenforced against tech companies until a local newspaper, The Stranger, published a story in December in the wake of the Russia allegations asking why.

Seattle sent letters to Facebook and Google asking them to provide data. The sides have been in talks, and last month Facebook employees met in person with commission staff.

“We gave Facebook ample time to comply with the law,” Barnett said.

Google has asked for more time to comply, and that request is pending, Barnett said.

Legal experts said they were unaware of any similar regulation attempts by other U.S. localities or states.

“Given the negative publicity around Facebook’s failure to provide adequate transparency in the 2016 elections, I would be surprised if they tried to challenge this law,” said Brendan Fischer of the Campaign Legal Center, a nonprofit that favors campaign finance regulation.

Reporting by David Ingram; Editing by Leslie Adler and James Dalgleish

Go to Source