Personal Privacy vs National Security - Research Paper Example

? Personal Privacy VS National Security Personal Privacy VS National Security In the world today it is seen that the acts ofterrorism have increased to the extent that they are interfering with the daily routine of human beings either directly or indirectly. It is because of this reason that several measures have been taken by the governments to ensure a terrorism free world. This situation has led to a confusion between the governmental agencies as to how much they should interfere in the lives of individuals. Because of this very reason different opinions have been formed regarding the methods which should be adopted to avert terrorism. Moreover it is seen that the roots of terrorism extend up to the general population and hence important measures are needed to root it out. Policies of counter terrorism are formed all over the world through which the governmental agencies aim to obtain information about individuals who are believed to be linked with the acts of terrorism. As the world has advanced it is seen that technology has had a great influence on these counter terrorism policies. The situation however gets complex when the question of intruding in the lives of people arises. The governmental bodies have been entitled by many governments to intrude the privacy of all the individuals who are considered to be linked with a certain act of terrorism. Privacy is one of the most fundamental rights laid down in almost every constitution formed by the countries. It is the duty of the governments to ensure that the citizens are getting this right regardless of the ethnicity, race, sex or religion of the concerned individual. It is this topic that has given rise to a debate between the government officials and the people who are concerned with privacy. While the government may be able to stop national threats, it’s not worth our personal privacy being violated and invaded like airport security groping young children, our personal information no longer being private and unnecessary video monitoring and surveillance. In 1787 Alexander Hamilton wrote that ‘to be safer, nations at length will become willing to run the risk of being less free’. This statement clearly means that national security threats at one time will be averted at any cost even if it harms the basic democratic rights of the citizens. With time it has been noticed that the statement was quite right as privacy has been denied to many individuals regardless of their association with any terrorist group. Previously privacy was considered as a privilege by the citizens which they could enjoy at any given cost however things have changed in the days today as the government is the sole authority which decides about the rights of individuals. In order to analyze a person the governmental bodies are using different methods through which their private data is being maintained. This data is then being used to identify the patterns or acts of the individuals and this whole process is known as data mining. If not legal, it is the moral responsibility of the government to maintain the privacy of all of its citizens, this being one of their basic rights. In some instances it is seen that the government does not apply limitations when they have to reach out to certain people. These acts include the new airport checking system which is harming the privacy of the individuals entering in different countries (U.S & Minow 2004). The rights of individuals to privacy has many benefits in itself. It protects the individuals from discrimination which may be done on the basis of the information that the authorities receive from them. And hence it can be said that the right to privacy can eliminate the social divide which may be created otherwise. Privacy of individuals is necessary to develop relationships and maintain peace in the society. Financial and health matters are private to individuals and these should not be known to the whole society. Breach in the privacy of individuals can create instability of the society and can ruin relationships of these individuals. The importance of privacy can be seen in the number of laws enacted in the United States of America. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), Gramm Leach-Bliley Act and Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) are all laws which urge the governmental bodies to maintain a limit on the privacy of the individuals. In some states it is seen that the maintenance of private information is being done differently. For example the personal information and privacy Protection Act of California makes it necessary for the state to form an office of privacy protection so that the privacy of the individuals can be protected (Kolesk 2007). These laws clearly show the importance of privacy which is being violated these days by different governmental bodies. The level of surveillance done previously was limited to certain acts or borders but nowadays it also creeping into the daily lives of individuals which is unacceptable to many. The public is mostly concerned when a great amount of personal information is leaked out and the necessary governmental bodies then interrogate the individuals on the basis of the information that they find. The surveillance being done these days is intruding in the privacy of the individuals and this is unacceptable. The level of surveillance has increased after 9/11 attacks and this raises a question ‘is privacy a casualty of the war on terrorism?’ (Macklem, 2001). There is no doubt that the level of breach of privacy seen in these days is beyond the imagination and expectation of nearly all civilized and peace-loving citizens. The recent wave of terrorism has also forced the authorities to find out new methods through which they can curb terrorism. It is for this reason that machines have been invented for security purposes and they are being used at different spots. A device has been installed in the airports so that the passengers can be checked by the relevant authorities. The machine gives a three dimensional naked image of the individual and this has raised many objections. This security parameter provides an excellent way to the authorities to scrutinize the passengers but on the other hand it violates the rights of privacy to an exceptional level. Many consider this parameter to be equivalent to being naked in front of the authorities. Hence it has been objected by many of the citizens (Samaha 2006). Similarly another machine has been put into place which produces images which are less real than the ones which the other machine produces. Here the question about intrusion into privacy is asked again by the individuals. If a machine could produce such results without interfering much into the privacy of the individuals then why was the machine not used previously ? Moreover other alternatives can be sought out by the government through which they do not have to intrude into the privacy of the individuals. A law signed by President George Bush has raised many concerns for the general public as it allows the law enforcement agencies to use wire traps and pen registers to detect any act of terrorism. This kind of law only allows the law enforcement agencies to interfere into the lives of the citizens as it may not be helpful enough to combat terrorism on a national level (Swaminatha, 2003). The Patriot Act has put forward new limitations onto the knowledge and aspects that should be known by the general public. Because of the increasing terrorism all over the world the Act has been introduced to limit the activities of the terrorists. It is for this reason that government intercepts in many activities without warrants or information to the person involved. The devices which are being used by the agencies can be of no such importance because all the devices of the citizens living in United States cannot be tapped at the same time. Moreover the information which is filtered through these wire taps is also limited and hence combating terrorism through these means is unnecessary. It only worsens the setting of privacy of individuals rather than fighting for the cause. Intruding into the lives of the individuals is considered illegal by many courts. In 1972 a case known as Keith Case was fought in United States against the government. The national security was at stake at that time and even in that situation the court did not allow the law enforcement agencies to spy on US citizens without any warrant. Moreover critics also argue that the law passed in the aftermath of 9/11 attacks does not allow the agencies to get involved in unauthorized tapping and spying of the individuals. The attempts on the privacy of individuals have not been effective enough to curb out the attacks of terrorism. Most of the wire taps which are done by federal bureau investigation lead to dead ends as suggested by a newspaper. Hence it can be said that these wire taps are only causing difficulties to the general population. The domestic spying program has not been supported by George Bush himself "When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so" (Beehner 2006). These civil liberties are a right of every individual in the society and if these methods of intrusion are not discouraged now they will lead to other menaces. Rights of privacy have to be assured to every individual in the society and if these are violated then the governmental agencies can also violate other civil rights. Warrants and wire traps should be classified when a terrorist is under question and our rights to know about the surroundings are limited in these situations. However the classification and limited rights should only apply to a person who is known to be linked to terrorist acts. The authorities should make sure that a person is dealing with terrorism before he is taken into consideration for limited rights. In my view national security is not above the constitutional right of privacy which should be guaranteed to every civilian. Up till now it has been seen that no such serious threat of terrorism has been averted by the counter terrorism agencies. Although the policies have also been aggravated in the United Kingdom a recent terrorism linked attack was seen in London when a subway was bombed. Thus it can be said that intruding in the lives of the individuals has brought no such good to the whole society. The national security measures should take this into consideration and should launch other offensives through which they do not have to intrude into the lives of civilians. References Klosek, J. (2007). The war on privacy. Westport, Conn: Praeger Publishers, p22. Macklem, P., Roach, K., Daniels, R. J., & University of Toronto. (2001). The security of freedom: Essays on Canada's anti-terrorism bill. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, p252. Samaha, J. (2006). Criminal justice. Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth, p125. Swaminatha, T. M., & Elden, C. R. (2003). Wireless security and privacy: Best practices and design techniques. Boston: Addison-Wesley, p157. United States., & Minow, N. N. (2004). Safeguarding privacy in the fight against terrorism: The report of the Technology and Privacy Advisory Committee. Washington, D.C.: The Committee. Q&A: NSA EAVESDROPPING: Privacy vs. National Security? Lionel Beehner 2006. NY Times. < http://www.nytimes.com/cfr/international/slot2_020506.html?_r=2> Read More