Homeland security essay design statement

Safety vs. Privacy: Breach of Citizen’s Rights and Privacy via Intelligence and Surveillance

David Jones

Matthew Stork

American Military University

HLSS498

03/12/2017

Throughout the globe in the history of policing, adopting the modern technology channels and devices has been the forefront measure to address the rising crime cadence. As a fact, substantial advances in innovation and technology have potentially granted diverse intelligence organs supremacy to conduct surveillance on its citizens. Moreover, constructing an outline of intelligence information from telephone companies, governments and electronic messages of citizens for the raison d'être of security, is an issue that has brood forth diverging debates across the nation. This has been a long-running debate whether citizens’ privacy is an issue of access or control in all security and intelligence agencies in the contemporary time. This owes to the fact that the American constitution passed by the Congress protects the American citizens against invasion of their privacy and rights as outlined in the first and fourth constitutional amendment (Agrawal, Goldberg, Wartanian & Yoshino, 2015). Thusly, this expounds on why there exists assorted controversies in the aforementioned organs since it is the mandate of the agencies to ensure the security of its citizens is advocated for at all cost. However, going to certain extends compromises the privacy and rights of many Americans in accordance to Oliver (2006). Intelligence profiling is satisfactory in a political structure but objectionable in a moral one. Hence, the surveillance and spying on innocent American citizens ought to be discontinued since this is an unambiguous breach of fundamental rights and freedoms of American citizens.

Further, the questions as to who owns an individual’s telephone and electronic communications information and whether the data owned by the individual ought to be controlled by the citizen or accessed by the agencies are still ongoing in the US. These are hot raged debate agendas between US telecommunication and technology companies and the nation’s intelligence and security agencies. Accordingly, diverse human rights organizations argue that the government security agencies surveillance, spying and eavesdropping on its American citizens is tremendously a critical issue. In accordance to the prior mentioned organs, the preceding mentioned surveillance on the nation’s citizens is a great control that could be utilized by security agencies to infringe on the private dominions of any individual. As an outcome, the agencies can disgrace, humiliate and even devastate an individual. The previously mentioned impacts on the individuals can be because of wiretapping on the individual’s communication devices thus triggering fear and intimidation to the citizen hereby undermining the person’s rights and freedoms as outlined in the American constitution (Weber & Staiger, 2014).

Correspondingly, the European Convention on Human Rights advocates for the respect of each individual’s privacy in every state. The charter also grants the citizens a channel to enforce their rights in cases of invasion under the code law by the authorities. Similarly, the US constitution clearly outlines in its first and fourth amendments’ the concept of privacy and intellectual freedom of every citizen. Therefore, these privacy protection charters vastly provide the American citizens with a shield from violation of their privacy by the government, intelligence and security organs (Bygrave, 2014).

Consequently, the First Amendment lawfully depicts the notion of intellectual autonomy to citizens in the US constitution. The First Amendment shields citizen’s rights of speech and press alongside their correlated freedoms of religion thought and inquest (McCord, 2013). Thereby, we can ascertain that the first constitutional amendment advocates for citizens right to speak hereby-protecting infringement of their freedom of speech and promoting their right to receive and dispose information with null fear of intimidation. Nonetheless, the surveillance of citizens and control of their data by the security agencies contravenes their right to pass truthful information or receive crucial data via their devices. This reciprocates to an impediment to their attaining of personal satisfaction and freedom of speech in fear of judgment and mortification (Richards & Cornwell, 2014).

Conversely, the Fourth Amendment in US Bill of Right also protects American citizens from encroachment of their privacy. The bill shields the citizen’s houses, persons, papers and affects against irrational searches and apprehension without affirmation form the relevant authorities. This palpably implies that it is of utmost value for law enforcers to pursue cybercriminals after their attainment of digital evidence, which is to be obtained with null breach of Americans citizens’ privacy. Hence, the previously mentioned bill of rights clearly outlines that privacy has a critical role to partake in providence of intellectual privacy of every American citizen (Solove & Schwartz 2015).

Agencies such as the National Security Agency (NSA) and Foreign Intelligence and Surveillance (FISA) have been revealed to monitor thousands of American citizens’ electronic mails and messages without warrants. As an outcome, these agencies have been on the vanguard towards creating the tension in US citizens that they are vulnerable to risks of being targeted as terrorists and criminals hereby limiting their freedom of speech. For instance, ‘the Snowden Revelations’ in 2013 vis-à-vis NSA alongside diverse internet companies plainly portray the puzzle of surveillance and the ‘Big Data.” Actually, Snowden disclosed that the big data comprised particular surveillance drifts highly correlated with IT and networks thus intensifying the surveillance of majority of citizens via the interconnected networks. This as Snowden stated created a channel of suspicion and fear in citizens despite them having nothing to conceal since they are being monitored and controlled through the big data. Ethically, Snowden regularly asked on whether anyone desired to live in a society that big corporations were breaching their privacy while the organizations themselves were more obscure (Lyon, 2014).

In summation, we can assert that there is particular status quo in the nation that calls for intelligence and security agencies intercession in the lives of citizens for example crime prevention scenarios. However, the interventions ought to be in alignment with the constitutional rights and freedom of the American citizens alongside principled legislation restrictions that do not violate the ideal of intelligence privacy as outlined in the human rights charter. This implies that the surveillance, spying and wiretapping of citizen’s international and local communication ought to be regulated more cautiously. This is during profiling intelligence information from citizens, corporate, government and telecommunication companies to eradicate fear and mutual suspicion among citizens that encumbers their personal fulfillment and expression.

References

Agrawal, N., Goldberg, A., Wartanian, R., & Yoshino, K. (2015). Mapping Global Surveillance and Proposing Solutions to Respect Human Rights. Retrieved on 2015 from,

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/36a9/5f793d87f54b23fb36a8bedf43a765860440.pdf

Bygrave, A, L. (2014). Data Privacy Law: An International Perspective. Retrieved on 2014 from,

https://script-ed.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/liddle.pdf

Lyon, D. (2014). “Surveillance, Snowden, and Big Data: Capacities, Consequences, Critique.” Sage Journals. Doi.10.1177/2053951714541861

McCord, G. (2013). What You Need to Know About Privacy Law: A Guide for Librarians and Educators: A Guide for Librarians and Educators. Santa Barbara, Calif: Libraries Unlimited, An Imprint of ABC-CLIO, LLC.

Oliver, W. M. (2006). The fourth era of policing: Homeland security. International Review of Law Computers & Technology. Abingdon, United Kingdom: Taylor and Francis.

Richards, M, N. & Cornwell, F, J. (2014). “Intellectual Freedom and Privacy.” Washington University School of Law. Retrieved from,

https://poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery.php?ID

Solove, J, D. & Schwartz, M, P. (2015). “An Overview of Privacy Law.” GWU Law School Public Law. Research Paper No. 2015-45; GWU Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2015- 45.

Weber, H, R. & Staiger, N, D. (2014). “Bridging the gap between individual privacy and public security.” Groningen Journal of International Law, Vol. 2. No. 2.