Scott points out that both organizations employ methods that "challenge the notion of independent scrutiny and impartiality"
Jonathan Scott, a cybersecurity expert, has alerted to the questionable practices employed by both Citizen Lab and Amnesty International, stating that they challenge the notions of independent scrutiny and impartiality. In his recent report titled "Pseudoscience: The Spyware Case of Omar Radi," Scott warns that these two organizations have a concerning track record of self-referencing and circular validation, which raises doubts about their credibility and objectivity.
According to Scott, the reports published by these organizations feature interconnected names and overlapping roles, creating a network of relationships that lacks impartiality. "Furthermore, the undisclosed identities of the individuals or entities behind these organizations give rise to doubts about their motives and potential biases," he points out.
Regarding the espionage accusations against Omar Radi, Scott asserts that Citizen Lab and Amnesty International "support and reinforce each other's accusations, establishing a clear pattern of circular validation," as noted by the Pegasus specialist.
Scott argues that the shared methodology and personnel between the two organizations diminish the credibility of their research, along with the lack of a "systematic and replicable scientific approach" in their investigations. He further criticizes Amnesty International for the lack of evidence and their delayed response to the requests from the Moroccan government regarding the case.
"The questionable 'methodologies' employed by Amnesty and Citizen Lab necessitate a more critical approach and a comprehensive evaluation of their practices to ensure transparency and accountability in the field of digital surveillance and human rights," concludes Jonathan Scott.