Surveillance and the State Essay Example for Free

watchfulness and the evince EssayIntroductionThe UK is more and more sleep walking into a direction society1 to the extent that it has become an inescapable damp of life.2 Every sequence we make a tele telephone call, send an email, browse the internet, or even walk down our topical anesthetic gritty street, our actions may be monitored and recorded.3 The increasing prevalence of care has perhaps led to the plead macrocosm viewed by its citizens as the Big Brother of Orwellian fame. This essay intends to focus on the impact of authorities surveillance and data collection has upon the privacy of citizens and, as a consequence, their relationship with the state. To effectively answer this capitulum there demands to be an examination of the various chassiss of surveillance and data collection and whether they argon constitutionally proper or improper, intrusive or legal, and whether there should be limitations to the quantity of information collated.The advancement o f technology in the 21st century has enhanced the quantity and integrity of surveillance information which begs the question ar we as a nation too stupid to realise how intrusive the UKs surveillance regime is? Is a citizens liberty and privacy at stake with the effects of surveillance from both everyday and private sector? moreover is the legislation governing this issue sufficient in its application? entirely these matters will be addressed. However, as there argon so mevery forms of surveillance, there will be a particular emphasis on fortune surveillance and the utilise of CCTV and databases. The ask for a general belief in the importance of case-by-case freedom and executive accountability is undoubtedly a necessity to the success of a constitutional democracy.Understanding oversight and its Components.The term surveillance mint be in brief defined as watching over which indicates monitoring the doings of persons, objects, or systems.4 There are deuce broad types of surveillance, mass surveillance and targeted surveillance. Mass superintendence is not targeted on any particular idiosyncratic and gathers information for future use, further, it has the potential to erode privacy. Whereas targeted is directed at particular psyches. It ignore be carried show up under a conniving or overt means If it is carried out under a covert operation, it is important to note, that the citizen is unaware of the use of targeted surveillance, so therefore the relationship with the state is unaffected by the use of this type.However if in the event where there was un practice of lawful targeted surveillance and the individual was to become aware, the consequences dope be detrimental to the relationship between the citizen and the state. It is important to note that alongside the state there are non state agencies and organizations which also occupy an increasingly signifi orduret component of surveillance systems today. The case of Patton v Poole Borough council where, only aft(prenominal) the surveillance had been completed by the council on a family, were they made aware of this. The council believed they were acting in abidance with RIPA, and that it was prerequisite for the prevention and detection of crime and it was proportionate for determining the genuineness of information supplied by Ms Patton.5 The tribunal in this instance found the council was in breach of RIPA and did not act in unison with Article 8. In coming to this conclusion the court had to determine the issue of whether the actions carried out by the council was necessary for the prevention or detection of crime and was it proportionate to what sought to be achieved. The legislation governing oversight and the protection of citizens is outlined in the Data credentials measure Act 1998, Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, the license of instruction Act 2000 and the 1995 European Data tribute Directive 95/46/EC. The Data Protection Act governs th e protection of person-to-person data however this act does not mention privacy of the individual. secretivenessThe need for privacy is fundamental in a high surveillance society such as the UK. retirement Internationals survey in 2007 which covered 47 countries indicated there had been in an increase in surveillance in the past year to the detriment of privacy galoshguards. 8 of these 47 countries were rated as organism enzootic surveillance societies which included the UK.6 The need to protect and facilitate the development of privacy of the citizen in order to husband healthy functioning of society is a necessity with the advancement of technology. Privacy is recognised as a fundamental right hand by various legal instruments,7 although Article 8(2) of the European Convention on humane effectives wins limitations.8 However in English law it is a known fact that there is no right to privacy, it has been suggested that privacy is of such importance to humanity that in the past it needed little formal protection.9 The high profile case of Kaye v Robertson10 illustrated the need for the right to privacy in the UK, where photographs of Gorden Kaye were published as he lay suffering from injuries in a car crash.GovernmentsThe political sciences evidence does not itself apologise how the collection of information helps in the pursuit of their objectives, or whether existing processing practices are proportionate to those objectives.11 The need for this may result in a conflict between the interests of the citizen and the aims of the state. Concerns were also raised about whether government agencies and other public bodies understood how the principles of necessity and proportionality operate in the context of privacy and limitations order out in article 8(2). In order to justify a an interference with article 8s stipulations, the state moldiness be able to show that it is acting lawfully and for a legalise aim and the interference is both necessary an d proportionate 12 (Hugh Tomlinson p 440)CCTV and how it relates to citizensA domicil Office dissect concluded that the CCTV schemes that have been assessed had little overall effect on crime levels.13 Critics further wall that mass intrusion into peoples movements may not be proportionate and a breach of their rights to privacy under the gentle Rights Act.14 On the roads, camera based restrictions of speed has increased from 300,000 in 1996 to over 2 cardinal in 2004 where an estimated 113 jillion in fines have been generated per annum.15 These statistics have not been welcomed by citizens and have received negative wring on the issue. However the overall increase in CCTV on the roads has no doubt contributed to a reduction in deaths and injuries. The state acknowledges how CCTV is valuable in preventing and detecting crime and the overall safety of society.Citizens can be reassured that they can go about their daily business with confidence, it gives members of the business community added security and sends a clear message to those engaged in crime or anti mixer behaviour that they will be caught and will be prosecuted.16 Further councillor Hazel Harding acknowledges how CCTV is popular with law durable members who see it as a preventative and feel much safer 17 agreeing with many members of society who believe, if you have nix to fear if you have nothing to hide. However the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) recognised the contribution of CCTV images is not recorded in a systematic manner.18 For example, the increased use of Automatic Number Plate Recognition, where cameras can read number plates and then check them against police databases to see if the cars are wanted for any reason, such as road tax, insurance and MOT. However this is not the only purpose of these cameras, every road substance abusers journeys are stored on a PSNI database for a minimum of two years regardless of the naturalness of the subjects.There are about 10 bi llion straightforward people movements stored on the UK database to participation. 15 million innocent peoples details are logged and stored everyday.19 The use of sophisticated data mining software product such as Northgate BOF 2.3, Advanced Data Miner is utilise by all police forces in the UK, which allows every journey a person makes to be tracked, traced, mapped and spied upon for the previous two years. Furthermore this is done without individuals consent. Furthermore to date, there has been no parliamentary debate nor legislation passed regulating its use. The system has no safeguards or unconditional scrutiny in place. The view that there is not and never can be justification for result and storing data information from innocent law abiding citizens by a government without the explicit allowance of the individual.On the other hand ANPR can be seen as an internationally recognised tool that can significantly reduce volume crime, provided the police use their ANPR system in a lawful, ethical and accountable manner for the purpose of preventing and detecting terrorism, serious crime, volume crime and road traffic offences.20 The question arises are the benefits of this outweighing the costs. Such technology enhances the notion that we are living in a surveillance society, others might argue that anything seen as aiding the police to catch murderers and combat crime is necessary.The information Commissioners Office, which advices organisations on the use of CCTV, says cameras must be reasonable and proportionate to maintain public assurance and must not breach the Data Protection Act.21 The Data Protection Act 1998 states that it should be clear from the outset that the purpose of the CCTV recording is to be stipulated and any subsequent deviation from that purpose constitutes a breach of the legislation. This can be applied to any form of information collation where it should only be used for the purpose it was originally intended.DatabasesThere is a need to gather and access personal information to support the delivery of personalised and better public serve fight crime and protect security reduce the burden on business and the citizen, and tackle social exclusion through early intervention.22 This quotation reflects on the acceptable intention of surveillance and is perceived as an indispensable tool in the day to day operation of social systems. Whereas once it was fairly safe to assume that personal records kept for purposes such as health, policing, social insurance, banking and driver licensing would be stored in comcheck bittively watertight containers, the computerization of these records means that they are readily amenable to different forms of integration. Given the immense repute dictated on personal data, both for commercial exploitation and for risk management, huge pressure is placed on these containers to yield their secrets in shareable ways..23 Surveillance in this context means focused attention to person al details aimed at exerting an influence over or managing the objects of data or data subjects as they are sometimes called.24 It can be considered an aiding instrument to organise. Under the Data Protection Act, bodies that are assemblage and collating data, be it health records, revenue information or even a school recording pupil information, are legally required to pay an annual fee of 35 to register with the Information Commissioner that they are collecting and storing such information. There is a two tier structure based on the organisations size and turnover, notification fees of 500 applies to data controllers with a turnover of over 25.9 million or employs over 250 members of staff.25 What is of name is who monitors how this information is organism used and how secure it is, or to put it other way, who watches the watchers? These questions concern the accountability of data collection. It is only when there is a breach of security that there is sentiency that not all b odies are compliant with the Commissioners requirements.These breaches tend to become of real public concern when they come to the attention of the media, affecting public relations with the governing bodies to the level of mistrust. For instance in celestial latitude 2007, it was revealed that a computer hard drive with the details of 3,000,000 UK learner drivers had gone missing in the regular army and that the details of 7,500 vehicles and their owner had been lost by the Driver and Vehicle Agency in Northern Ireland. in addition in DATE the junior officers of HMRC lost personal details of all families in the UK with a minor under 16.The corroborative of data collection this is in the combating of postiche. This can be considered as a law enforcement activity which uses data collection. Statistics have indicated that the use of this form of surveillance to combat fraud can be considered proportionate to combating its aims as success in respect of NHS savings of 189 million in 2005, the National fraud Initiative savings of 111 million in 2005-06, and 10 million saved in respect of check and plastic card fraud.26 Where revenue databases are concerned it is not unreasonable to assume that every individual is treated as a suspect. Innocent people are investigated. Here the question arises again, is the invasion of an individuals privacy necessary in order to prevent fraudulent claims?ConclusionIn conclusion, the advances in technology in this field have permeated our society resulting in the citizen subconsciously accepting surveillance as part of every day life. Surveillance data can be very powerful and can enable consumers to perform a wide range of functions, which can be perceived as part of the issue how wide should that use deviate from the initial intention before it can be deemed wildcat and ultimately exploitive. Among these functions include assessing banking information, health records, constructing consumer profiles in the name of facilitati ng efficient services, the topical issue of mobile phone calls, and sending and receiving electronic mail.27 It is important to realise that these same advantages can be considered a threat to certain(prenominal) aspects of society through misuse and mismanagement.There are two sides to this argument of proportionality. And no conclusive blanket(prenominal) solution.Perhaps we are due a sequel of George Orwells publication, possibly titled 2084. One wonders what premonitions would he postulate if he were here today.The introduction of CCTV was viewed as a tool to reduce the amount of crime. To date there is very little substantive research evidence to support this.28 Perhaps if the state were to provide more community policing on the streets of the UK this may be more productive. Further, a review carried out by the base of operations Office that looked at street lighting found a significant reduction in the levels of crime to the order of 20%.29The results from a YouGov Poll30 h ave indicated that 79% of people believe that Britain is increasingly being described as a surveillance society. And a further 66% do not trust governments of whatever political party to keep information on databases confidential. Although 97% agree to CCTV in banks and grammatical construction societies and a further 85% In my opinion the state wishes to control us absolutely, and to achieve this, it must know absolutely everything about us, every minute of our day.Surveillance Web the rise of visual surveillance in an English city BibliographyLegislationTextbooksGoold B and Neyland D, New Directions in Surveillance and Privacy (2009 Willan Publishing.) Haggerty K and Samatas M, Surveillance and Democracy, (2010 Routledge.) Hier S and Green J, The Surveillance Studies Reader, (2007 Open University Press) Mattelart A, The Globalization of Surveillance, (2010 Polity Press.) Barendt, Privacy as a constitutional Right and Value, (1997 Oxford University Press)JournalsTaylor N, State S urveillance and the Right to Privacy Surveillance and Society 1(1)66-85. Lyon D, Everyday Surveillance, personalized Data and social classifications Information Communication Society, (2002) Routledge. vol 5 issue 2,WebsitesPrivacy International Leading Surveillance Societies in the EU and the World Survey 2007 accessed 3 declination 2011.Nidirect Government Services, How is CCTV used in the Community, accessed 05 December 2011.http//www.bigbrotheriswatching.co.uk/http//www.ico.gov.uk/for_organisations/data_protection/notification/cost.aspx Information Commissioners Office website.Newspaper articlesR Ford, heed Rise of Big Brother State, warns data Watchdog The Times,16 rarified 2004. Sunday Times, A Camera network designed to catch criminals is being move on innocent motorists reports David Leppard. 4/4/2010. Philip Johnson, Home Affairs Editor, Your Life in their Lens, 02 November 2006 The Telegraph. Q A Birmingham Terrorist Cameras, 17 June 2010.YouGov/ free-and-easy Teleg raph, 28th- thirtieth November 2006.MiscellaneousSurveillance Citizens and the State Volume 1 Report House of Lords select committee on the Constitution 2nd Report of Session 2008-09.M Gill and A Spriggs Assessing the Impact of CCTV, London Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorie, 43, 60-61.Surveillance, Order and friendly ControlEnd of Award Report to the Economic and Social Research Council in respect of grant L210252023Clive NorrisDepartment of Social Policy, University of HullState Surveillance and the Right to PrivacyNick Taylor1Jane CliftRespondent and Slough Borough CouncilYour life in their lens the telegraph1 R Ford, Beware Rise of Big Brother State, warns data Watchdog The Times,16 August 2004. 2 Surveillance Citizens and the State Volume 1 Report House of Lords select committee on the Constitution 2nd Report of Session 2008-09 para 1. 3 Ibid.4 Ibid para 185 Patton v Poole Borough Council (2010) IPT/09/01/C) para 8. 6 Privacy International Leading Surv eillance Societies in the EU and the World Survey 2007 accessed 3December 2011. 7 See UN General Assembly, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 10 December 1948, Council of Europe, European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and fundamental freedoms, 4 November 1950, Directive 95/46/EC on the Protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and the free movement of such data. Privacy regulations aimed at governing how personal information is processed were introduced in the 1970s and 1980s.8 European Convention on Human Rights, Article 8(2) There shall be no interference by public authority with the put to work of this right except suchas is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well being of the country. 9 Barendt, Privacy as a constitutional Right and Value, (Oxford University Press 1997) p 7. 10 Kaye v Robertson 1991 FSR 62.11 Surveillance Citiz ens and the State Report, (n2) at 69. 12 Surveillance Citizens and the State Report, (n2) at 127. 13 M Gill and A Spriggs Assessing the Impact of CCTV, London Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorie, 43, 60-61. 14 Sunday Times, A Camera network designed to catch criminals is being turned on innocent motorists reports David Leppard. 4/4/2010. 15 Philip Johnson, Home Affairs Editor, Your Life in their Lens, 02 November 2006 The Telegraph. 16Nidirect Government Services, How is CCTV used in the Community, accessed 05 December 2011. 17 Councillor Hazel Harding, Leader of Lancashire County Council and chair of the Local Government Association Safer Communities Board. 18 Surveillance Citizens and the State (n2) at 7419 http//www.bigbrotheriswatching.co.uk/20 Police Service of Northern Ireland, Policy Directive PD 01/08 PSNI ANPR Systems, 17 December 2007. 21 http//www.bbc.co.uk/news/10341867 Q A Birmingham Terrorist Cameras, 17 June 2010. 22 Ibid at p 21.23 Surveilla nce studies Reader Get in short loan lib24 D Lyon, Everyday Surveillance, Personal Data and social classifications Information Communication Society, vol 5 issue 2, (2002) Routledge. P 1. 25 http//www.ico.gov.uk/for_organisations/data_protection/notification/cost.aspx Information Commissioners Office website. 26 Surveillance state and citizens report.27 S Hier and J Green, The Surveillance Studies Reader, Open University Press, (2007) pg. 77. 28 R Armitage, To CCTV or not to CCTV (2002) Nacro, Crime and Social Policy Section 29 Ibid.30 YouGov/ Daily Telegraph, 28th- 30th November 2006.