1129 words

Key Issues for the New Parliament 2010 SECURITY AND LIBERTY House of Commons Library Research

Surveillance in society Grahame Danby

The effective and proportionate use of and state is a delicate balancing act

Richard Thomas, the former Information REGULATING SURVEILLANCE data or the methods of acquisition compromise LEGISLATION SUMMARY Commissioner, once famously remarked The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act this separation? that the British people were in danger of 2000 (RIPA) controls, among other things, One proposal, subsequently abandoned on Human Rights Act 1998: A qualified “sleep walking into a surveillance society”. covert surveillance. Together with associated privacy grounds, was to store communications right to privacy. Any intrusion should be Many civil liberty groups would argue we secondary legislation and codes of practice, it data in a centralised government . An proportionate. have now woken up in one. Others might, provides a framework designed to ensure that alternative would be to impose requirements : Disclosure pointedly, retort that as long as surveillance public authorities comply with the European on internet service providers to keep extra data and retention of personal data must be is deployed democratically by people always Convention on Human Rights. in a way that would make it easily accessible – fair. Exemptions apply. above reproach, if you have nothing to hide Could formalising surveillance powers particularly by agencies and Regulation of Investigatory Powers you should never have anything to fear. lower the threshold for using them? How the security services. A Communications Data Act 2000: An authorisation framework for Surveillance, in its many forms, is undoubtedly can proportionality be factored in reliably? Bill, mooted in the last Parliament, would be various surveillance activities by specified an important tool in combating terrorism and Concerns that some local authorities have needed to implement this. public authorities. serious crime. been misusing their investigatory powers have Crime fighting (or deterrence) is a major led to a recent tightening of the codes and function of CCTV cameras – and the UK has retention into sharp focus. For how long PRIVACY AND PROPORTIONALITY authorisation procedures. more per head of population than any other should the DNA of innocent people be Privacy and proportionality are the praetorian Local authorities are among the wide country. They are the eyes of the and retained? guards that stand in the way of unfettered range of public authorities able to access security services. The ears are communications The allows for the surveillance. Privacy can be important if your communications data. This is data about a intercepts, such as telephone taps, governed gradual introduction of ID cards by secondary political beliefs or trade union activism don’t communication and not the actual content: for under RIPA by a warrant system. Independent legislation – and this has already begun, enjoy the approval of a potential employer. example a telephone number called but not commissioners provide oversight and a tribunal starting with some (non EEA) foreign nationals Similarly your spent convictions or religious the conversation itself. This kind of information serves as a focus for citizen concerns. Will and (voluntarily) specified British citizens in beliefs (or absence of them). You might think has traditionally been kept by communications RIPA safeguards retain their effectiveness in certain parts of the country. However, the your health records or sexual life should not service providers for billing purposes. RIPA sets the necessarily secretive world of national and Conservatives and Liberal Democrats intend to be public property, or that of the State. The out the rules and reasons regarding access; the international surveillance? cancel this process. The details of how this will Data Protection Act attaches the most careful latter include crime detection. The range of be achieved are yet to be laid out. attention to these kinds of “sensitive” personal data that must be retained has recently been A DATABASE STATE? Though the approach of the new Government data. increased to include the internet, thanks to Sharing and comparing data between different appears to have settled the future of ID cards, regulations implementing the European Data Terrorists, serious criminals and fraudsters clearly databases can be a useful tool in the fight the competing cases for and against large Retention Directive. have something to hide. Few would want against terrorism and crime – fraud is a good government databases remain. Large, shared few stones unturned to bring such people to While the regulations implement example. It can also lead to more efficient repositories of personal information threaten justice. But what about comparatively minor in full the corresponding EU directive, the UK’s “joined up” and citizen-friendly public services. civil liberties and can be enormously costly. infringements: the risk-taker who bends the Interception Modernisation Programme aims With all this in mind, the last Parliament passed On the other hand, they may facilitate more rules; the pensioner whose dog fouls the local to keep pace with changing technologies a range of data sharing measures. efficient and co-ordinated public services and park; the parents questionably claiming they to extend further the type of data that has offer and crime-prevention Two databases have attracted much recent live in the right education catchment area for to be retained, interactions in chat rooms benefits. As technology continues to improve, attention: the national DNA database and the their child? Where to draw the line? When to and social networking sites included. Can this debate will undoubtedly rear its head in databases associated with the introduction rein in the “dustbin stasi”? communications data always be separated from some form again. of identity cards. The former throws data its actual content? Could the nature of the

86 87