Recent information leaks from whistle blowers, such as Edward Snowden, and Julian Assange, revealed that the NSA had increased its mass surveillance, specifically with regards to the collection of ‘big data’. While some commentators, say that mass surveillance is a necessary evil (Monk, 2013), and that “you have nothing to fear if you have nothing to hide”, others say that state mass surveillance is a gross misuse of power (Suleman, 2013). This essay will seek to critically discuss both the merits, and shortcomings of mass state surveillance in the digital age. The discussion of this topic is relevant as several whistleblowers have recently leaked information detailing several large scale state surveillance programs. Firstly, this essay will
…show more content…
The use of mass surveillance by several countries has been repeatedly criticised by several key members of the United Nations. A report published by the top official for human rights and counter terrorism stated that the continued use of mass surveillance has effectively done away with the right to privacy of communication on the internet, and that it is incompatible with the current concept of privacy for the state to collect metadata all the time, indiscriminately (UN, 2014). The United Nation's criticism of mass surveillance displays how deeply it violates human rights, in that the way it currently operates violates the concept of privacy entirely. Furthermore, mass surveillance programs have also been shown to violate the fundamental right to freedom of expression. A report published by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (2015) suggested that British surveillance committed by the Government Communications Headquarters conflicted with several articles of the European Convention of Human Rights, mainly article 10, the right to freedom of expression. Violation of this right has several negative impacts on society, such as inhibiting the public's ability to hold the government to account, or limiting the ability of the press to report on certain stories (Christensen, 2015). Continued use of mass state surveillance would only serve to amplify those negative impacts, as it would be violating this right on a large scale. However, while mass surveillance does violate several human rights, it is often justified as necessary in order to protect society. In fact, the second article of paragraph 8 in the European Convention of Human Rights details how an infringement of privacy can be committed by the state if three conditions are met: the violation is in accordance with the law, is necessary in a democratic society, and has a legitimate
The use of mass surveillance by several countries has been repeatedly criticised by several key members of the United Nations. A report published by the top official for human rights and counter terrorism stated that the continued use of mass surveillance has effectively done away with the right to privacy of communication on the internet, and that it is incompatible with the current concept of privacy for the state to collect metadata all the time, indiscriminately (UN, 2014). The United Nation's criticism of mass surveillance displays how deeply it violates human rights, in that the way it currently operates violates the concept of privacy entirely. Furthermore, mass surveillance programs have also been shown to violate the fundamental right to freedom of expression. A report published by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (2015) suggested that British surveillance committed by the Government Communications Headquarters conflicted with several articles of the European Convention of Human Rights, mainly article 10, the right to freedom of expression. Violation of this right has several negative impacts on society, such as inhibiting the public's ability to hold the government to account, or limiting the ability of the press to report on certain stories (Christensen, 2015). Continued use of mass state surveillance would only serve to amplify those negative impacts, as it would be violating this right on a large scale. However, while mass surveillance does violate several human rights, it is often justified as necessary in order to protect society. In fact, the second article of paragraph 8 in the European Convention of Human Rights details how an infringement of privacy can be committed by the state if three conditions are met: the violation is in accordance with the law, is necessary in a democratic society, and has a legitimate