Over recent months, with the Edward Snowden leaks, we have seen the extent of surveillance by various security and intelligence agencies. This raises vital questions in relation to individual liberty and the need to maintain collective security.
Although I agree with the need to use the internet to track known criminals, I believe this should limited and tightly controlled. It is my belief that the mass collection and storage of emails, text messages and other such communications should not be the default position of any government agency or private organisation. However, on a counter note, government agencies should have access to these communications if there is justifiable cause and permission is given in the form of a court order. Such a justifiable cause may include, but not exclusively, paedophilia, terrorism and human trafficking. But again, adequate prior proof should be gathered before permission is granted to access an individual's personal communications. Furthermore, such information gathering should have a specified target and objective such as gathering additional proof or tracking potential collaborators.
An area of concern in recent years is that the intelligence community have used their techniques, not only to protect society, but also to garner information during diplomatic missions and negotiations. This is an unjustifiable and potentially dangerous use of the intelligence services and should not be permitted. This reasoning is based on the idea that yes, such intelligence gathering may offer short term advantages, but will harm our long term diplomatic prospects in the process. As such, it is not in our long term interests to use our intelligence services in a manner such as this.
In conclusion, it is my firm belief that intelligence gathering should be limited and tightly controlled. Furthermore, it should be used only when justified by adequate prior evidence and coupled with specified targets and tightly defined objectives. These objectives should not include however the collection and use of information gathered specifically for the purpose of diplomatic advantage during any diplomatic negotiation (except when hostages are involved). This intelligence gathering should only be used to aid criminal investigations and to protect society from potential terrorism or other such threats. As such, specific rules should be set out by legislatures, implemented by the intelligence services and enforced by the judiciary.
Thanks for reading,
Jason Cates
Although I agree with the need to use the internet to track known criminals, I believe this should limited and tightly controlled. It is my belief that the mass collection and storage of emails, text messages and other such communications should not be the default position of any government agency or private organisation. However, on a counter note, government agencies should have access to these communications if there is justifiable cause and permission is given in the form of a court order. Such a justifiable cause may include, but not exclusively, paedophilia, terrorism and human trafficking. But again, adequate prior proof should be gathered before permission is granted to access an individual's personal communications. Furthermore, such information gathering should have a specified target and objective such as gathering additional proof or tracking potential collaborators.
An area of concern in recent years is that the intelligence community have used their techniques, not only to protect society, but also to garner information during diplomatic missions and negotiations. This is an unjustifiable and potentially dangerous use of the intelligence services and should not be permitted. This reasoning is based on the idea that yes, such intelligence gathering may offer short term advantages, but will harm our long term diplomatic prospects in the process. As such, it is not in our long term interests to use our intelligence services in a manner such as this.
In conclusion, it is my firm belief that intelligence gathering should be limited and tightly controlled. Furthermore, it should be used only when justified by adequate prior evidence and coupled with specified targets and tightly defined objectives. These objectives should not include however the collection and use of information gathered specifically for the purpose of diplomatic advantage during any diplomatic negotiation (except when hostages are involved). This intelligence gathering should only be used to aid criminal investigations and to protect society from potential terrorism or other such threats. As such, specific rules should be set out by legislatures, implemented by the intelligence services and enforced by the judiciary.
Thanks for reading,
Jason Cates
No comments:
Post a Comment