Deontology is the action by an individual to adhere to his own independent morals and any related rules and regulations. This concept is closely related to ethics where an individual performs a certain action due to the morality behind it or the duty associated with the action. In the situation of professional setups, a person is required to adhere to certain rules and regulations as a form of duty. Disclosure of information that may be considered private is one such action. While in some circumstances, the so-called whistleblowers will disclose information in the name of duty or ethics, the data exposed may be potentially harmful to national interest. Disclosure of matters of national interest should be solely dependent on the foreseen or
…show more content…
An ethical argument against disclosure in this case is that exposing certain information may be potentially harmful to national security and complicate the work of the security officials. Snowden’s revelation was injurious to the country’s security measures through surveillance techniques since the disclosure gave terrorists an advantage by providing them with information on the techniques used by the US national security departments. The terrorists became aware of ways to avoid surveillance after Snowden’s disclosure (Greenwood, 2014, p. 1). Thus, the disclosure affected the national interest as well as security negatively. In such cases, it may be argued that it would be ethical to maintain secrecy on matters of national …show more content…
Therefore, non-disclosure would only infringe on the people’s rights (Global Campaign for Free Expression, 1999, p. 3). It would be ethical to disclose information in such instances. Furthermore, in case non-disclosure involves hiding criminal acts and misuse of power, ethical practices dictates that one is obligated to report such offences. However, one must be careful not to threaten national security or incite conflict in the process of disclosure. It would be unethical if the disclosure was to negatively impact on the
An ethical argument against disclosure in this case is that exposing certain information may be potentially harmful to national security and complicate the work of the security officials. Snowden’s revelation was injurious to the country’s security measures through surveillance techniques since the disclosure gave terrorists an advantage by providing them with information on the techniques used by the US national security departments. The terrorists became aware of ways to avoid surveillance after Snowden’s disclosure (Greenwood, 2014, p. 1). Thus, the disclosure affected the national interest as well as security negatively. In such cases, it may be argued that it would be ethical to maintain secrecy on matters of national …show more content…
Therefore, non-disclosure would only infringe on the people’s rights (Global Campaign for Free Expression, 1999, p. 3). It would be ethical to disclose information in such instances. Furthermore, in case non-disclosure involves hiding criminal acts and misuse of power, ethical practices dictates that one is obligated to report such offences. However, one must be careful not to threaten national security or incite conflict in the process of disclosure. It would be unethical if the disclosure was to negatively impact on the