The Issue of Fighting Terrorism Using NSA Programs - Essay Example

Carter due: Carter Introduction Terrorism is defined as any act that consists of violent activities or an action that jeopardizes infrastructure, human life or property. Such activities are seen to have an impact on a policy of government through intimidation, coercing general public or the behavior of a government through assassination, hostage taking or kidnapping. According to the United Nations, terrorism is a criminal activity that is calculated or intended to produce a state of fear in the civilian population.1 After the 2001, September 11 attacks, the U.S. government termed all kinds of non-state force ‘terrorism’. Terrorism results from religious extremists, states, insurgents and criminals.2 Due to the challenges faced by the government to fight terrorism, new technologies have emerged to assist with the fight against terror. Some of these technologies include private communication of individuals around the world and mass surveillance of U.S. citizens. The DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) reported that it has created an information technology that could allow access to personal identifiable information to be utilized in the fight against terrorism. As a result, this has attracted a lot of questions from the general public as well as political bodies on its effectiveness, legal and ethical standards. The concern revolves around the likelihood of the government utilizing personal information on permanent resident aliens and U.S. Citizens that has been gathered by private or public organizations without their consent.3 The reasons provided by the government on the use of these technologies has been shown to be inefficient, illegal and immoral. The justification of surveillance According to NSA, there are two programs that focus on the foreign and domestic surveillance. The domestic program, ‘metadata program’ functions in accordance to section 215 of the USA Patriotic Act and consist of gathering of call record data inclusive of times of calls and phone numbers. The foreign program ‘PRISM program’ works according to section 702 of (FISA) Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. FISA Act permits a government to perform surveillance that targets the content of communication by non-U.S. citizens that are situated abroad. This surveillance obtains foreign intelligence data. President Obama in 2014 acknowledges the ‘legitimate privacy interests’ of the non-U.S and U.S. individuals as conformity to fundamental principles. He defines the activity of foreign intelligence information as a way of obtaining details in associations to activities, abilities, and intentions of foreign aspects or governments, terrorists, and organizations. In addition, President Obama defends the NSA programs stating that they are intended for the purpose of ‘detecting and countering’ terrorism, financial crimes, nuclear proliferation, threat to U.S. forces and espionage. The Falicy A report by New America Foundation alleges that the claims by the government about the function of NSA ‘bulk’ surveillance of email and phone communications register keeps U.S. secure from terrorism, are misleading and exaggerated. A research carried out involving 225 persons working for al-Qaeda or motivated by al-Qaeda’s concept, in the U.S. proves that established investigation techniques such as targeted intelligence operations, or use of informants contributed more to impetus investigations than NSA bulk surveillance.4 In addition, New America Foundation suggest that surveillance of American phone information has no discernible effect on preventing terrorism activities but prevent minor acts such as fundraising for a terrorist movement. Moreover, analysis on the use of database of U.S. residents’ telephone information in a single plot, raises the question of the need for Section 215 bulk collection program. The government states that the U.S. phone metadata permits intelligence bodies to move quickly by ‘connecting the dots’ and stop forthcoming 9/11 attacks rather than the traditional challenge of proof in relation to criminal warrants. This was proven to be false by Moalin case, where the FBI waited for a period of two months to start an investigation and wiretap a culprits’ phone after employing the NSA’s phone database to connect a call from Somalia to Moalin.5 Illegal and immoral A report by New York Times disclosed that NSA was performing wiretaps of international e-mails and telephone calls that were not warranted. This was after the Bush Administration believed that one of the participant in communication had links with al Qaeda. The illegal activity of eavesdropping occurred for a period of four years and indicated a drift from the Agency’s foreign focus. The government defended the wiretaps program but in real sense it was an illegal activity. According to Wiretap Act, there must be a warrant issued for wiretaps in criminal investigations. In addition FISA demands that a warrant for wiretap that involves ‘electronic surveillance’. From this perspective the program fell outside FISA’s definition of ‘electronic surveillance’ hence it could not obtain domestic content nor target U.S. citizens. Therefore, because NSA has deliberately gone against Wiretap Act and FISA Act, the program seems to be illegal. From the aspect of immorality, on May 11, 2006, USA Today suggested that the NSA had in its possession and was holding records recognizing a lot of telephone calls made by U.S. citizens constituting the biggest database ever collected. This information cannot be proven but it seems that NSA could be having a database with details on important part of domestic calls. It is immoral because such information trespasses people’s privacy and the act is against the Stored Communications Act. The Stored Communications Act does not permit public telecommunications providers to provide call data to the government without a court order. In addition, Congressional research discovered unethical means used by government agents to get hold of calling records. Some unethical behavior involved the act of ‘pretexting’ where corrupt data brokers pretended to be customers in order to get data and telephone records. These brokers offered their services to non-government entities and private investigators. Some government agents utilizing these services run in states which limit law implementation access to the obtained data. Conclusion In conclusion, the issue of fighting terrorism using NSA programs should be reviewed to ensure that citizens are safeguarded against inhuman acts. The priority of any government is to ensure that its residents are safe through legislations. For instance, President Obama did not mention anything about the government duties under ICCPR. The U.N. Human Rights Committes are of the view that the ICCPR needs a state power to honor and make sure people are given treaty rights within a state party’s boundary. The role of a government in this case is to consider the objective of ICCPR to enhance human rights and also consider the practical concerns of directing a state to oversee adherence to those rights around the world and their respect. Article 2(1) of the ICCPR binds each state party to honor and make sure that people in their habitat and under its jurisdiction have their rights identified in the current agreement’. In addition, the principles of treaty construction under Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties demand reading of a treaty ‘in accordance with the normal meaning of its words’. The ‘ordinary’ meaning of two situations related by a conjunctive, ‘and’ in that a duty arises upon fulfillment of both situations. This implies that a state has a duty under ICCPR to people who are ‘subject to its jurisdiction’ and ‘within its territory’. References Smith, Paul J. The terrorism ahead: Confronting transnational violence in the twenty-first century. Armonk: ME Sharpe, 2008 Shemella, Paul, ed. Fighting Back: What Governments Can Do About Terrorism. Stanford University Press, 2011. United States, Dept. of Defense, Newton N. Minow. Safeguarding Privacy in the Fight against Terrorism Report of the Technology and Privacy Advisory Committee. DIANE Publishing. Read More