US and EU rank poorly in protecting privacy rights

Wildbore · #1 (**permalink**) 12-30-2007, 10:42 PM

Quote:

By Jill Lawless, The Associated Press

LONDON - Individual privacy is best protected in Canada but is under threat in the United States and the European Union as governments introduce sweeping surveillance and information-gathering measures in the name of security and border control, an international rights group said in a report released Saturday.

Canada, Greece and Romania had the best privacy records of 47 countries surveyed by London-based watchdog Privacy International. Malaysia, Russia and China were ranked worst.

Both Britain and the United States fell into the lowest-performing group of "endemic surveillance societies."

"The general trend is that privacy is being extinguished in country after country," said Simon Davies, director of Privacy International. "Even those countries where we expected ongoing strong privacy protection, like Germany and Canada, are sinking into the mire.

"I'm afraid that Canada has kind of lost the plot a plot a little bit this year and hence its move downwards," Davies told the Canadian Press in comments about Canada.

He cites the C-I-A's accessing the banking records of Canadians through the SWIFT banking information system, the Canadian no-fly list, and the Toronto Transit Commission's installation of security cameras as examples of the erosion of privacy rights.

He also decried the increasing number of programs involving the United States, which he said unfortunately has no federal privacy law.

"What's happening, is that Canadian information, sensitive information, is flowing across the border in increasing volumes," Davies said.

"Frankly, that's the sort of situation where government should put pressure on the U.S. government to protect that information legally," he said, "But it's not doing so."

The report came two days after Privacy Commissioner Jennifer Stoddart warned in a release that 2008 will be "another challenging one for privacy in Canada."

"Heightened national security concerns, the growing business appetite for personal information and technological advances are all potent - and growing - threats to privacy rights," Stoddart said.

In the United States, President George W. Bush's administration has come under fire from civil liberties groups for its domestic wiretapping program, which allows monitoring - without a warrant - of international phone calls and e-mails involving people suspected of having terrorist links.

"The last five years has seen a litany of surveillance initiatives," Davies said.

He said little had changed since the Democrats took control of Congress a year ago.

"We would expect the cancellation of some programs, the review of others, but this hasn't occurred," Davies said.

Britain was criticized for its plans for national identity cards, a lack of government accountability and the world's largest network of surveillance cameras.

Davies said the loss earlier this year of computer disks containing personal information and bank details on 25 million people in Britain highlighted the risks centralizing information on huge government databases.

The report said privacy protection was worsening across western Europe, although it was improving in the former Communist states of eastern Europe.

It said concern about terrorism, immigration and border security was driving the spread of identity and fingerprinting systems, often without regard to individual privacy.

The report said the trends "have been fueled by the emergency of a profitable surveillance industry dominated by global IT companies and the creation of numerous international treaties that frequently operate outside judicial or democratic processes."

The survey considers a range of factors including legal protection of privacy, enforcement, data sharing, the use of biometrics and prevalence of CCTV cameras.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/0...obal_privacy_1

I actually like the idea of national identity cards and wide-spread CCTV cameras. I don't think they take away from privacy at all. When I am in public, people are watching me already, so whats the big deal about being frightened of some cameras, which can supplement police and thus reduce taxes. Identity cards would also be useful, as it would ensure that only citizens could use services designed for citizens.

I am still glad I live in Canada where warrant less wire-tapping does not occur, and if it does, it would quickly be challenged in the Supreme Court. However, I wish the US would stop the data mining into the personal info of Canadians, and I agree with the director of Privacy International that our government should put more pressure on Washington to stop this.

Chesby05 · #2 (**permalink**) 12-30-2007, 10:50 PM

Doesn't a social security card or driver's license work in the same way as an `identity card'? Without all the negative connotations?

nonsqtr · #3 (**permalink**) 12-30-2007, 10:59 PM

Yeah, SWIFT is a horrible thing, just terrible. That's one of the worst things that's happened since Watergate, and hardly anyone knows about it! It involves co-opting foreign citizens in private industry to be US spies.

But yeah - I mean, this is just another of the many pieces of hypocrisy in George Bush's world-view, yes?

I mean, on the one hand, he's telling "us" domestically, that "national security" (read: sovereign national borders) are the "most important priority" -

And then he's trampling around the rest of the world, pretending those borders don't even exist, and that the US somehow has "dominion" over whoever it wants to that day.

That guy is a real menace.

But not to worry, it's only a few hundred more days. now. I just pray the guy doesn't "accidentally" do something wrong before that.

lunecat · #4 (**permalink**) 12-31-2007, 12:16 AM

Quote:

Britain was criticized for its plans for national identity cards, a lack of government accountability and the world's largest network of surveillance cameras.

I can confirm that Britain has CCTV cameras everywhere, roads and towns - only in rural places are you free from them!

nonsqtr · #5 (**permalink**) 12-31-2007, 01:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lunecat

I can confirm that Britain has CCTV cameras everywhere, roads and towns - only in rural places are you free from them!

You do know that they're very easy to "fool", yes?

Blade · #6 (**permalink**) 12-31-2007, 01:32 AM

This privacy crap has gone way overboard.

TarBaby · #7 (**permalink**) 01-02-2008, 08:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blade

This privacy crap has gone way overboard.

How so? Its a fundamental right that is being severely eroded.

raytri · #8 (**permalink**) 01-02-2008, 08:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blade

This privacy crap has gone way overboard.

Okay, Mr. "conservative". Where do *you* draw the line at government surveillance? Camera at the end of your driveway? Camera in your car? Peering your window? Looking over your shoulder at work? In the bathroom?

lunecat · #9 (**permalink**) 01-02-2008, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raytri

.....
Camera in your car?
.....

The UK is moving towards "pay as you drive" to replace the road tax disc. Each car will have to be fitted with a tracking device and you pay for your mileage how much depends on which roads you use and when. They claim its a congestion busting policy, and a fairer way to pay for the roads you use ....

OK its not a camera in your car but a location tracking device

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/05...u_drive_roads/

Using satallite technology to track everyones car location and bill the registered owner of the car.

I'm against it myself

Daybreaker · #10 (**permalink**) 01-02-2008, 11:37 AM

The government does not need to spy on its people. When it does, it's only serving itself, not the people it's supposed to represent.

Bookmarks
Digg	del.icio.us	StumbleUpon	Google	Yahoo	Furl	Reddit

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode