Seeing it all
In the early 2000s, there were rumours going around that ‘if you were reading a newspaper in the morning, America would be reading it with you’. It seemed like a ludicrous notion at the time but in retrospect it may have been quite close to the truth. The United States — post 9/11 — pushed to pass the USA Patriot Act which vastly expanded the government’s surveillance ability by giving it unfettered right to spy on its citizens, and simultaneously reducing powers of judicial review, accountability and to challenge government searches in court.
In June 2013, Edward Snowden made public a secret order of a US court against a phone company by the name of Verizon who were giving daily phone records of millions of its users to the National Security Agency (NSA). This was shocking news for the general public having revealed that most of the telecommunication network providers were secretly passing on customer phone records to NSA. USA justified its surveillance techniques by stating Section 215 of the USA Patriots Act, by which an order is granted ex-parte and its reasons may not be disclosed for national security purposes.
This prompted the United States to make certain changes as such provisions were a blatant disregard of the First Amendment rights. Therefore, on May 31, 2015 the USA Patriots Act, along with Section 215, was repealed and replaced by USA Freedom Act 2015, which requires the NSA to get permission from a US federal court before obtaining any information from phone companies.
In June 2013, Edward Snowden made public a secret order of a US court against a phone company by the name of Verizon who were giving daily phone records of millions of its users to the National Security Agency (NSA)
Pakistan, however, is surprisingly not too far behind in its quest to disregard privacy by adopting its own surveillance techniques. A UK based group by the name of Privacy International recently issued a report on security and surveillance in Pakistan. Rumour has it that Pakistan is in the process to acquire high level surveillance machinery from the US as it is looking to further enhance its procedures in the same regard.
A surveillance mechanism must be backed by domestic law legalising the procedure and Pakistan has its fair share of such laws. Section 5 and 10 of the Anti-Terrorism Act (1997) allow a range of officers to enter and search premises without a warrant on ‘reasonable suspicion’ provided the officer satisfies himself that there is an evident link to terrorism. Similarly, The Investigation for Fair Trials Act (2013) allows access to data, emails, telephone calls, and any other form of computer or mobile-phone based communication subject to a judicial warrant. The warrant on the other hand, can be requested by an officer if he has ‘reasons to believe’ that a citizen is, or is ‘likely to be associated’ with, or even ‘in the process of beginning to plan’ an offence under Pakistani law. The Prevention of Electronic Crimes bill (2015) (a new bill presented in the national assembly, has not been passed as yet) currently allows state officers to order for the retention or provision of communications data from operators or communication networks. These orders are subject to a judicial warrant but there is no mechanism for a judge to review or vet the grounds, necessity or proportionality of the action taken.
On the other hand, international law holds a different point of view in such surveillance matters. Pakistan is a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam. Article 17 of ICCPR and Article 18 of the Cairo Declaration both specifically lay emphasis on the importance of the right to privacy. The Cairo Declaration goes as far as saying ‘it is not permitted to spy on him, to place him under surveillance or to besmirch his good name. The state shall protect him from arbitrary interference.’
A surveillance mechanism must be backed by domestic law legalising the procedure and Pakistan has its fair share of such laws
Similarly Article 14 (1) of the Constitution of Pakistan confirms that ‘the dignity of man and, subject to law, the privacy of home, shall be inviolable.’ This right is purely fundamental and takes precedence over any other domestic law; therefore, Pakistan must tread carefully not to challenge the supremacy of the constitution and ideally should perhaps direct its efforts towards producing laws that actually respect the right to privacy.
If, however, Pakistan’s surveillance mechanism is going to be state of the art American technology which will provide unlimited powers to the state to keep an eye on its citizens, then at the very least it may want to keep strict checks and balances on the procedure. If there was ever a time for giving into intuitions, now would be it. My intention is surely not to create a state of paranoia but we need to be more conscious of what we say and when we say it. WhatsApp, Viber, Facebook, Skype, etc, are popular sources of communication in this day and age; and a feeling of being monitored by Big Brother will indeed have an unsettling effect on the people.
