Privacy Violation Rights by Government Intelligence and Security Organizations

It is very trick and risky to address an issue that will also be debated in a court of law and especially the Supreme Court. This is because discussions in such an area of public interest may be seen as an attempt to swing or influence the decision of a case that is already in a court of law. As more information comes in, perceptions change and newer opinions are crafted. In brief, the Federal Bureau of Investigation has in its possession an IPhone that was used by one of that nabbed bombers in Malibu resulting to the direct death of 14 people (Hopkins & Reynolds, 2002). The bureau has requested the maker of the phone Apple Inc. to help it with software that can compromise the security checks and help the investigators to obtain information that can help them fight terrorism and therefore save lives. This order was carried out by a federal judge after the request of the justice Department.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Apple has dissented to the request by the court judge based on the rationale that doing so was not in the greater good as the same software would expose hundreds and millions of apple users across the globe consequently violating civil and privacy rights. The CEO of Apple Tim Cook in an ABC News interview stated eloquently the reason for doing this. The CEO is convinced beyond doubt that this would bring a public security scare issue with millions of users having their lives being potentially affected in their lives . The greater danger however is that complying with the order may create precedence for other governments and agencies to attempt breaking in their citizens IPhones.

This is a complex issue with a no and yes side to it and is deemed to go far beyond the specific of the case and be debated for a long time. A lot of observers and critics do however agree that there are basic ethical issues in the story, they believe that the basic ethical issues here are about the conflict of two legitimate values: privacy versus security. To sustain a democratic society both of these values are important. When confronted with either/ or of these situations and a choice has to be made most people will chose security over privacy even if it comes to the detriment of freedom. The big dilemma therefore comes down to this one question: how far are we willing to put our security on the altar in protection of our privacy. Compounding to this problem is the fact that we all have very different ways in which we make the determination.

There are however positive aspects to this controversy. This is because issues to do with terror, conflict between privacy and security and technology are issues being discussed in our nation today at all levels of the government and even the governed. There is a vibrant debate on these matters with all and sundry contributing to them. It is out of that conversation that consensus will be created and molded (Hopkins & Reynolds, 2002). A consensus to decide what is the correct way to address those issues. In a democratic society, consensus is a powerful and effective way to govern. A democratic society as ours requires consensus to be an indispensable condition, yet still consensus to be productive calls for every person to bring to the negotiating table out of the opportunities of experience and insight given to them.

Privacy and surveillance post-9/11

The right to privacy in America is currently under siege and this siege is from a perfect storm: the revolution in technology; the emergence of a postmodern surveillance society following the occurrences of the September 9-11 attack; thinning of the line between the collection of information and intelligence for law enforcement purposes; failure in US laws; and the obsoleteness of the judiciary laws to keep in pace with these developments. The results of this law crunch down has been that technologically advanced surveillance programs have swept this country contrary to the operation of the law and in a manner not subject to judicial review and political accountability. These programs have only been subject to political expedience and voluntary limitations. In this paper we review how new and advanced technology that promises faster connectivity has given the opportunity to government law enforcement agencies the chance to government to violate the ethics of rights to privacy by data mining and surveillance (Hopkins & Reynolds, 2002). We also look at how the systemic and structural failure of the governments checks and balances have given way to the apparent erosion of the Americans citizens right to privacy.

In the normal way of doing things, that is the constitutional way of doing things, congress is responsible for making law or enacting legislature, the work of the executive is to implement this law while the judiciary holds these two accountable and reviews their actions. The power of each of these arms of governments is restrained by the oversight of the other two. This system of intertwined insight has however totally failed when it comes to this area of national surveillance. Many a time, the executive arm of governance has failed gone out of its way of the prescribed law; further congress has continuously failed to curb these violations and instead ratifies the errors of the executive with even more far reaching and expansive authorizations. Judiciary on the other hand for most of its part has exhibited an unwillingness to cooperate with the law it should protect. The judiciary is indifferent when it comes to say what the law is or what it explicitly states, it has instead dismissed significant challenges in surveillance based on unproven procedural grounds.

Changes and advancements in technology

Technology has advanced to the level that it has been widely adopted by Americans in their day to day communication activities. Private communication is taking place in the lives of Americans through electronic means like the various social networks, email and message services. Banking is being done electronically and so are doctors appointments, dating and even shopping are increasingly becoming part of the online platform way of life. Even more Americans as are other citizens globally are storing their transactional data there. This is happening as a response to market needs that in addition to provision of services which the Americans need depend on, telecommunication providers and several other business enterprises have come up with new business models that rely on collected and stored data about their customers.

Today we have many ideal e-mail services at our disposal. It is possible for users to store enormous amounts of information containing ones personal records on many things like financial statements and medical history. This information is being continuously archived online for the convenience of administrators and their users. The many benefits that technology avails also does bring many risks. Converting this information to digital forms and storing it online by third parties has introduced immense risk to the privacy of this information.

Advances in the field of technological and the governments apparent anxiety over acts of unprecedented terror and other global crimes have resulted to rise in a complex surveillance industrial system. The Washington Post calls this alternative geography system of the United States. The new state comprises the national surveillance state; this is made possible by the high proliferation of government technologies and bureaucracies that can retrieve vast and detailed amounts of data about individuals as minimally as possible and without having to go through lengthy judicial procedures and in secrecy. Today the government has achieved technologies and abilities to single out any American and follow them their purchases, movements and reading habits as well as private messages. The government is not also afraid of using this power.

The employee of a telecommunication company, Sprint reveals that the company received many requests about the location of their clients by analysis of cellular phone signals. This number was so high, 8 million in a year that the company decided to give unrestricted access to the government via a web interface and this all happened without informing their customers. Location data can be at times sought under very questionable circumstances highlighting the potential for abuse.

Outdated and overly permissive laws

Ethical dilemmas with the privacy and security laws occur because of several reasons of which some of the major reasons are the failure by the U.S laws to keep pace with technology. The overarching and existing legislation on data protection electronically today which is the famous Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), was unfortunately published in in the 80s and this was before the internet developed to what we know it as it is today. A huge gap exists between ECPA language, technology and protection is today. The electronic mail exemplifies the gap. ECPA is inconsistent with how it treats the search warrants to search emails today.

Foreign intelligence is by far the most laxed laws in the country. According to these laws, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act clearly outlines that the American government does not have to show or demonstrate an inclination to suspicion of wrongdoing. The government can in its own sole will and discretion undertake electronic covert operations domestically and within its jurisdictions if the source of such suspicion is a foreign agent of power. What makes the design of this law even more outrageous than the ECPA is that to obtain the covert surveillance warrant, the admission to do so is sought by the executive from a secret court that is the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance court and whats more is that the proceedings are classified and the public does not need to know about it.

FISA was brought to enactment in 1978 after the aftermath of two investigations commissioned by Congress, the Church and Pike committees. These two committees exposed that the government had time and again abused power and right to privacy by conducting domestic electronic surveillance against the press unilaterally. This surveillance was extended to journalists and members of congress and this was all done in the excuse of national security. Congress rethinking these abuses and infringement on ethics of privacy restructured the act to only involve members of foreign powers. Post 9-11 the government ratified the USA PATRIOT Act introducing major amendments in FISA that weakened it. Today, the government only needs to demonstrate that their significant intention in domestic surveillance is to gather foreign related intelligence (Blum, 2008). These reforms and amendments have significantly weakened and brought down the wall that existed to issue a safeguard for the American from an unabated constitutional protection that is applicable in foreign intelligence investigations.

The FISA Amendment Act was amended by congress in 2008 and instituted what is currently the governments most dangerous tool in surveillance authority. With this new change, the government can wiretap and snoop communications belonging to Americans internationally. The face value for this new act suggests the American interest in securing surveillance targeted at non-U.S. persons who are living abroad (Bowden, 2013). However one of the effects of this act is that it empowers the security and law enacted forces to perform dragnet surveillance operations on international communications if any communications end is outside the United States. There exists little or no judicial surveillance of the surveillance. Some specific procedures and algorithms need to be implemented to ensure that only domestic communi...