Until now, the terror and panic caused by the 9/11 attacks still haunt the authorities. Since the devastating experience, policies and laws have been passed in order to counter terrorist activities. Government seemed to have pushed these policies so hard that it has put individual privacy aside. By and large, ordinary people are subjected to undue surveillance. They end up either as suspects of terrorism or victims of privacy violation. The laws that were passed to protect them are the same laws that curtail their freedom.
A closer look at some of these policies would reveal how individual privacy is invaded. A number of peaceful political organizations in the U.S. are being monitored. Their activities are tracked because they are considered as “terrorist groups”. These are people who only wanted political reforms, but end up in the list of terrorists. The only reason for doing such extreme action is because the groups gather together. Simply put, there is no longer such kind of freedom that they used to call self-expression.
Pity also those who advocate care for the environment and those union activists who end up in terrorism-related databases. In California, pro-environment groups are being watched for the same reason. Unionism used to be encouraged because it helps people to wield a stronger force that would push for reforms. It is different now because they too are branded as terrorists. Ordinary civilians who may not even have a hint about terrorism are being place under surveillance.
At present, there are law enforcers who secretly monitor and photograph people at public meetings. There is no reasonable basis for such actions, but are being done in order to prevent any untoward plans. From now on, anybody can be monitored and photographed anytime, anywhere! This is clearly invasion of privacy.
Authorities are overreacting to the situation. There is so much apprehension that only one side of the situation is given attention. Many questions have been raised regarding surveillance of ordinary citizens. The manner it is being done is becoming more intense. This would eventually strip off from people their privacy. Further, people who would lose faith in the authorities might finally choose terrorism as a better option because of prejudice against them.
A revisit of the set privacy laws and policies would greatly improve the situation. What should be done in order to strike a balance between national security and privacy? What should be done so that citizens would feel more secure and happier? What should be done so the government can guard its constituents from terrorism?
Image courtesy of:
No comments:
Post a Comment