Saturday 11 October is international day against Government Surveillance. Taking place and the street; they come in response to a wave of civic projects of legislative changes that significantly broaden the scope of action of Government information services. Changes which, in turn, disproportionately or not, are responsive to the terrorist danger. Hot debate is now around data retention legislation from telecommunications.
Take the opportunity to include a theoretical concern of my older colleagues from the CADI, the relationship between liberty and security and to formulate the problem on a general level. The problem is often formulated in terms of "the right to a private sphere," and limits of the law, which limits change with technological developments placed both on hand for those good and wicked.
Why is it important right to a private sphere '? The most visible danger for the individual is the disclosure of some things that he'd prefer to tina under silence. Some ' institutional analysis ' pull out but to reveal a deeper, danger linked to the competition:
First of all, the competition policy. Our world, as we know, depends on a functioning democracy, the struggle between power and balanced opposition. With the help of the intelligence services, the current power structures will be able to discover the strategies of political opponents. If weapon information secret services will be strengthened and located only at the discretion of the power, the opposition will be constantly slipping and controlled in harm of individuals governed.
Second economic competition. Sure, if internet providers and telecommunications companies will be obliged to store the entire contents of communications to the clients it obviously will raise the cost of services. Cost of services will grow but also other reason. Facilitating access to existing companies to other economic agents communication means to provide their content business strategies made about other entrepreneurs and potential competitors.
What you might say to the other side? What kind of protection we could reasonably expect from a too narrow limits State action?
Presents: Ike Domas
Special guest: Marian Zulean, CADI, associate lecturer. at the Univ. in Bucharest, a specialist in national security issues.