The disturbances and terrorist activities, as well as rapid technological advances have influences the development and prosperity of government surveillance. The authorities around the world claim that application of various surveillance methods and tools is essential for both national and international security purposes. However, the modern surveillance has turned from direct watch of suspects to mass surveillance that monitors all the population, regardless of the fact that the majority is law-abiding citizens. Such situation has spurred the debate around the issue of government surveillance, its status, legitimacy and effectiveness in deterring criminals. Despite the fact that government surveillance may be useful for security purposes, it still causes more harm than good, as it unjustifiably infringes human rights, receives monopolistic powers to control information and hinders intellectual privacy and progress.
Government surveillance is not compliant with national and international documents protecting basic human rights and freedoms, such as right for privacy and a fair trial, freedom of speech and information. There are a lot of surveillance practices that are done secretly and unreasonably, and they do not have any previous suspicion or legal permission to do that. United Nations annual report states that “the disturbing lack of governmental transparency associated with surveillance policies, laws and practices, which hinders any effort to assess their coherence with international human rights law and to ensure accountability” (Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, 2014, p.16). The state authorities simply do not provide necessary information to population and international organizations regarding their surveillance methods, so people are not able to assess how their life is affected by their privacy invasion.
Government surveillance gives the monopoly to control information to a state and it hinders freedom of speech and information, as well as net neutrality. Government collects metadata from the major telecommunications corporations and it provides them with excessive powers. UN report claims that “states with high levels of Internet penetration can gain access to the telephone and e-mail content of an effectively unlimited number of users and maintain an overview of Internet activity associated with particular websites.” (Emmerson, 2014, p.5). The power to control such information can give the authorities together with a few telecom companies the unlimited mechanisms to control the flow of information and its speed. It can mean the end of net neutrality and largely affect freedom of information.
Government surveillance is also harmful to intellectual privacy, creativity and progress. Massively monitoring population has a purpose of searching deviant and unusual behavior. According to Richards “when we are watched while engaging in intellectual activities, broadly defined — thinking, reading, websurfing, or private communication — we are deterred from engaging in thoughts or deeds that others might find deviant” (Richards, 2012, p. 1948). Under the surveillance people become careful with what they say and do, and try very hard to avoid making mistakes. It triggers stagnation, as unusual behavior and eccentricity are the qualities that promote creativity and progress. Therefore, surveillance harms intellectual freedom of people and hinders the development of the society.
Government surveillance hinders the rights individuals and groups and is harmful to society. It violates the basic human rights and freedoms without any sufficient reason and limits the possibilities of people to exercise their rights for privacy. Government surveillance also creates a mechanism for receiving excessive power over information that threatens net neutrality and freedom of speech and information. What is more, the surveillance may have implications for the development and progress of the society, as it hinders creativity and innovation. The evidence proves that the negative influence of surveillance on the society outweighs its positive implications.
References
Emmerson B. Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms while Countering Terrorism, UN GAOR, 69th sess, Agenda Item 68(a), UN Doc A/69/397 (23 September 2014)
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). The right to privacy in the digital world. UN GAOR, 27th sess, Agenda Items 2 and 3, UN Doc A/HRC/27/37 (30 June 2014)
Richards, N. M. (2012). Dangers of Surveillance, The Harvard Literature Review, 126, 1934-1965.
