Credits: SkyNews Anon, (n.d.).
The Government Mass Surveillance Powers
Key question: Do you think it is impartial that government and high-ranking officers take advantages of their authority to commit unlawful interception? On the other hand, if the sovereign of data is controlled by government power, what are the bottom lines drawn to safeguards our citizen's right of privacy.
After a depth understanding of how telecommunication technology transformed and operated, in this article, I would like to explore the relationship between mass surveillance powers and unlawful interception that based on telephone line and wiretapping.
When I mention about "Wiretapping", I believe that most of you might still remember Trump's claimed on tweeter remonstrated the Former U.S. President Barack Obama wiretapped his phone in Trump Tower during the 2016 election. US investigators wiretapped Paul Manafort, President Donald Trump's former campaign chairman, under secret court order before and after the 2016 US presidential elections.
| "When I say wiretap, those words were in quotes, wiretapping is pretty old fashioned stuff, that really covers many other things." - Trump's response to his claim on tweeter. In here, 'Wiretap' is not the case. More importantly is its impact, the secret use of the government mass surveillance powers. Sky News. (2018).
In terms of the U.S. Law, interception of communication including unlawful surveillance and monitoring is likewise determined as RIPA2016 which is consist as crime, is illegal. Under US law, the FBI would need to obtain a warrant from an intelligence court to conduct surveillance operations. It is a federal crime to wiretap or to use a machine to capture the communications of others without court approval, unless one of the parties has given their prior consent. It is likewise a federal crime to use or disclose any information acquired by illegal wiretapping or electronic eavesdropping, as well as other method in terms of interception of communication. LII / Legal Information Institute. (2018)
Therefore, to answer Trump's question 'Is it legal for a sitting President to be "wire tapping" a care for president prior to an election? The answer is No. It is illegal.
--------------
In consequence, if even the U.S. Leader disobedience the offence of unlawful interception, as well as exceeding of privileges of cheating on a president election, we - as a citizen, how much of a right of privacy do we have? Where has this democracy gone?
Credits: ProtonMail Blog. (2018).
Pay bills for getting stalk?
Come back to the U.K., if you are a UK resident, you probably are familiar with the 'Investigatory Powers Bill', which is based on legitimises the security services surveillance powers while adding checks on their ability to gather information about citizens without a warrant. Under the The Investigatory Powers Act (IPA), security services are able to hack into citizen's computers, networks, mobile devices, servers and more under the proposed plans. Legislation.gov.uk. (2018). In which, draw an attention on the secret use of government's mass surveillance powers, interception of communication has become a strategy in order to monitoring whilst manipulating different parties.
Thence, does it worthwhile to even pay to the government to stalk at us? Impotently, after I read all these news about the darker side behind the scene, as well as terrorism as dirty cyber warfare between country and country. Presumably, the government power with its sovereign of data certainly has created a system of control with disciplinary.
Offence of Unlawful Interception
In the past, the interception of communications has been used as a modus of detecting and preventing crime rather than prosecuting it in the UK. The Telecommunications Regulations 2000 allowed companies to record calls without permission for business purposes, security purposes, as well as research purposes or other personal reasons. Under the English Law before 2016, Interception of communication specifically phone tapping and internet tracking was once legal for any individuals to tape conversations provided the recording if its information was only apply for personal use. Interception was a legitimate surveillance tool accessed to any individuals who was willing to 'investigate', 'observe' or negatively to 'spy' or to 'stalk' other parties. Netlawman.co.uk. (2018).
Eventually in 2016, the UK's mass surveillance powers have legislated offence of unlawful interception as illegal followed by RIPA2016. Any individual's would be committed as an offence, including monitoring without appropriate permission, surveillance without a SIA CCTV licence or other approval licence, or anyone intentionally intercept a communication of its transmission by a public and private telecommunication system or a public postal service. Legislation.gov.uk. (2018). Markedly, there are way more specific terms and conditions safeguarded citizen's right of privacy, in order to against crimes and terrorism. The local authority use of RIPA also applied to reduce loan sharks and rogue traders, consumer scams, sale of counterfeit goods or any unsafe products. In short, under the law, no one is now allowed to intercept other parties without a permission, except for certain public bodies, including police commissioner and ISP Internet Providers.
--------
On the positive side, the IPA and RIPA has a deterrent effect in order to reduced the number of hackers and cybercrime unlawfully intercept information from any channels. However, the complete surveillance and system of control do not have a clear bottom line in terms of human rights of privacy. I believe as a citizen, we concern about our privacy space, we concern in what extend are we being monitored. Say for instance, can they access to my computer's file and browse all of my photographs or even card details? It is crucial that we come to understand how this system operate, therefore to prevent unnecessary data leakages.
Reference:
Sky News. (2018). Donald Trump refuses to back down on Barack Obama wiretap claim. [online] Available at: https://news.sky.com/story/donald-trump-refuses-to-back-down-on-barack-obama-wiretap-claim-10803272 [Accessed 16 Apr. 2018].
ProtonMail Blog. (2018). The Investigatory Powers Bill and Online Privacy - ProtonMail Blog. [online] Available at: https://protonmail.com/blog/investigatory-powers-bill-email-privacy/ [Accessed 16 Apr. 2018].
Chris Cillizza, C. (2018). Donald Trump still has no evidence that his wiretapping claim was right. [online] CNN. Available at: https://edition.cnn.com/2017/09/19/politics/trump-wiretapping-manafort/index.html [Accessed 16 Apr. 2018].
LII / Legal Information Institute. (2018). 18 U.S. Code § 2511 - Interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications prohibited. [online] Available at: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2511 [Accessed 16 Apr. 2018].
Legislation.gov.uk. (2018). Investigatory Powers Act 2016. [online] Available at: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2016/25/contents/enacted [Accessed 16 Apr. 2018].
Netlawman.co.uk. (2018). The Telecommunications Regulations 2000. [online] Available at: https://www.netlawman.co.uk/ia/telecommunications-regs [Accessed 16 Apr. 2018].
Legislation.gov.uk. (2018). [online] Available at: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2016/25/pdfs/ukpga_20160025_en.pdf [Accessed 16 Apr. 2018].
Comments