There are exactly two years, three journalists and I were working feverishly in a Hong Kong hotel room, waiting to see how the world would react to the revelation that the National Security Agency (NSA) of recorded information relating to almost every phone call in the United States. The days that followed, the journalists and others have released documents revealing that democratic countries governments were conducting monitoring of private activities of ordinary citizens who had nothing to apologize for.
After of just a few days, the US government responded by filing a complaint against me under espionage laws dating from the First World War. Lawyers have told journalists that they risked being arrested or subpoenaed if they returned to the United States. Politicians have rushed to condemn our initiative, calling it anti-American, even claiming that it was treason.
In private, there were times when I feared we have not put our comfortable lives in danger for nothing – and that the public would react with indifference or cynical about the revelations. I’ve never been so happy to have been wrong.
Two years later, the difference is profound. In the space of a month, the intrusive monitoring program calls the NSA has been declared illegal by the courts and disavowed by the Congress. After an investigation of the White House has determined that this program did not have prevented a single terrorist attack, even the president, who had earlier defended his merits and criticized the revelation of its existence, finished by ordering that it put an end.
This is the power of an informed public. The end of the mass surveillance of private telephone calls under the US Patriot Act, a landmark victory for the rights of each citizen, is only the latest dated result of a global consciousness. Since 2013, institutions across Europe have declared laws and similar illegal operations and imposed new restrictions on such activities in the future. The UN has said that mass surveillance was clearly a violation of human rights. In Latin America, Brazilian citizens efforts have led to the adoption of the Marco Civil, the first Declaration of the Rights of the Internet in the world. Recognizing the essential role of an informed public in correcting excesses of government, the Council of Europe called for the adoption of new laws to prevent the persecution of whistleblowers.
Beyond law, progress has been even faster. Experts work tirelessly to review the safety of devices around us, and the language of the Internet itself. Secret faults in essential infrastructure, which had been exploited by governments to facilitate mass surveillance have been detected and corrected. Basic technical protection measures such as encryption – a time considered esoteric and unnecessary – are now enabled by default in the pioneering companies like Apple products, which ensures that even if your phone is stolen, your privacy remains Private. Such structural changes in technology can provide access to basic protection of the right to privacy beyond borders and defending ordinary citizens against the arbitrary adoption of laws that do not respect privacy, such as being implemented in Russia
If we go back far, the right to privacy. – base of the liberties enshrined in the American Declaration of Rights – remains threatened by other programs and authorities. Some of the most popular online services in the world have become partners of mass surveillance programs of the NSA, and governments around the world are putting pressure on technology companies to work against their customers rather than for them. Billions of geolocation data and communications continue to be intercepted under other powers, without regard to the guilt or innocence of the persons concerned.
We learned that our government intentionally weakens security Basic Internet, through “back doors” that turn into open book of privacy. The interception and monitoring of metadata revealing personal ties and interests of ordinary Internet users are on an unprecedented scale: while you read this, the Government notes
Apart. the United States, the heads of the secret services in Australia, Canada and France have exploited the recent tragedies in order to try to get new intrusive powers, despite compelling evidence that they would not have allowed to prevent these attacks. British Prime Minister David Cameron recently asked rhetorically: “Do we want to allow a means of communication between the people we [the state, note] can not read?” He soon found his response, claiming that “For too long, our company shows tolerant and passive, telling the citizens: as long as you comply with the law, we will leave you alone” When passing. in 2000, few would have imagined that the citizens of democratic and developed countries would soon be forced to defend the concept of open society against their own leaders.
However, the relationship of forces start change. We are witnessing the emergence of a post-terror generation that rejects a world view defined by a particular tragedy. For the first time since the attacks of Sept. 11, we discern the outlines of a policy that turns its back on the reaction and fear to embrace the resilience and reason. Whenever justice gives reason that the legislation is changed, we demonstrate that the facts are more convincing than fear. And, as a society, we are rediscovering the value of a law is not measured in what it hides, but that it protects.
No comments:
Post a Comment