Site news

POLICE DIGITALLY MANAGING LAW AND ORDER OR MASS SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM ARE DANGEROUS?

 
 
Picture of System Administrator
POLICE DIGITALLY MANAGING LAW AND ORDER OR MASS SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM ARE DANGEROUS?
by System Administrator - Saturday, 31 January 2015, 5:55 AM
 

By : M.S.Yatnatti: Editor and Video Journalist Bangaluru :Safety of digital data with mass digital Surveillance and monitoring system with cameras every where is the point for discussion. Digital transformation is changing our lives and no one can ignore it. Use it for good O.K or even it can be disastrous if it used by criminals and antisocial elements .Everything has positive and negative side and the same applies to mass digital Surveillance and monitoring system with cameras every where in schools colleges hotels bunks shops internet cafes and everywhereand interestingly there is no law which prohibits the misuse of digitally captured data.Whoowns the data so recoded publicly and who uses the data so recorded publicly and how misuse can be eliminatedneed serious debate .Everybody has access to pen cameras and button cameras and record it .Any telephone conversation can be recorded .We have double standards if someone take photograph even in public you object and file an FIR and if everybody install publicly digital Surveillance and monitoring system with cameras every were and record it and take photographs we have nothing to say and no FIR is booked. How much is too much. Taking photography in public areas and publicly visible is not a crime then why FIR is booked by police in many cases .Recently an FIR was booked on DIG Police and an RTI Activists for allegedly taking photograh at public place and public visible areas when at the same place mass digital Surveillance and monitoring system with cameras are taking photos and videos .The visitor take photograph is illegal and mass digital Surveillance and monitoring system with cameras owners take is legal. Where both can use it for good or bad purpose .In US and India legally speaking taking photography at publicly visible places and public platform is not illegal.

The many report highlights many examples of digital surveillance, including instances where governments have threatened to ban the services of telecommunications companies unless given access to traffic on their networks; used surveillance to target political opponents, or dissidents; and required companies systematically to disclose bulk information on customers and employees. While recognizing that surveillance of electronic communications data can be necessary for legitimate law enforcement or intelligence reasons, when conducted in compliance with the law, the report also cautions that governmental mass surveillance programs

Mass digital Surveillance and monitoring system with cameras should not become Mass snoop gates .Five human rights groups urged the United Nations (UN) General Assembly to adopt a new resolution against indiscriminate mass surveillance. The draft resolution, titled "The right to privacy in the digital age" was introduced by Germany and Brazil in November in the wake of the NSA mass surveillance revelations. It calls upon states to respect and protect the right to privacy, including in the context of digital communication and to take measures to put an end to violations of those rights.States should also review their procedures, practices and legislation regarding the surveillance of communications, their interception and collection of personal data, with a view to upholding the right to privacy by ensuring the full and effective implementation of all their obligations under international human rights law, according to the draft resolution. oreover, states should establish or maintain existing independent, effective domestic oversight mechanisms capable of ensuring transparency and accountability for state surveillance of communications, their interception and collection of personal data, the draft said.