The Impact of Surveillance and Data Collection upon the Privacy of Citizens and their Relationship with the State

Open Rights Group response to 'The Impact of Surveilance and Data Collection upon the Privacy of Citizens and their Relationship with the State'

The Constitution Committee is conducting an inquiry on the constitutional implications of the collection and use of surveillance and other personal data by the State and (insofar as they can be used by the State) private companies, particularly with regard to the impact on the relationship between citizen and state. Deadline 8 June. Call for Evidence (word document) and Press Release

Background

The Committee will be looking at the constitutional implications of relevant policy developments in relation to the collection and use of surveillance or personal data. This could include, but is not restricted to, the following issues:

  • Audio-visual surveillance technologies used to monitor and record people’s behaviour and movements (including, for example, the use of CCTV).
  • Information systems and processes used to identify individuals and information about them (including, for example, the DNA database, the NHS Spine and ID cards).
  • Data-sharing between Government departments, local authorities and other public bodies.

The Committee has appointed Professor Charles Raab, Professor of Government at the University of Edinburgh, to act as Specialist Adviser for the duration of this inquiry.

Concise submissions of 1500 words or fewer are preferred. Unless submissions are very short, they should also be accompanied by a single-page summary. Annexes may be submitted, but will not necessarily be published. Relevant material prepared for other purposes (such as reports or submissions to other inquiries and consultations) may be submitted to the Committee for information, but will not be printed. Witnesses who submit original written evidence may be invited to give oral evidence at Westminster; transcripts of such sessions are published and available on the Committee’s website.

In particular, the Committee invites evidence on the following:

Theme 1

How has the range and quantity of surveillance and data collection by public and private organisations changed the balance between citizen and state in recent years, whether due to policy developments or technological developments? Which specific forms of surveillance and data collection have the greatest potential impact on this balance?

Response

The quantity of survalance is all down to the breakingof the Data Protection Act 1998

Notes

Need to move away from collecting as much information as possible about people and instead focus on collecting only the information needed for the task in hand.

  • RFID-based tracking systems:
    • Passports
    • Oyster cards
  • Monitoring internet use:
    • Search engine logs
    • ISPs keeping logs of websites visited
  • DNA database
  • Fingerprints:
    • Police
    • Schools
  • Cameras:
    • Number-plate recognition systems
      • National Vehicle Tracking System
      • London Congestion Charge
    • Facial recognition
  • NHS Care Records Service
  • Universal Child Database
  • Spyware

Theme 2

What forms of surveillance and data collection might be considered constitutionally proper or improper? Can the claimed administrative, security or service benefits of such activities outweigh concerns about constitutional propriety? If so, under what circumstances? Is there a line that should not be crossed? If so, how might that line be identified?

Response

No-one's written anything yet so just go ahead, delete this and get your word in first!

Notes

Proportionality.


Some recent surveillance state Acts and bills:

Theme 3

What effect do public or private sector surveillance and data collection have on a citizen’s liberty and privacy? Are there any constitutional rights or principles affected?

Response

No-one's written anything yet so just go ahead, delete this and get your word in first!

Notes

  • Freedom of speech
  • freedom of the press
  • Freedom of association
  • Freedom of assembly
  • Freedom of movement
  • Privacy
  • Increased risk of fraud

Theme 4

What impact do surveillance and data collection have on the character of citizenship in the 21st century, in terms of relations with the State?

Response

No-one's written anything yet so just go ahead, delete this and get your word in first!

Notes

Paranoia. It creates an impression that the State does not trust the people, therefore the people are not to be trusted. If everyone is treated as if they're guilty, even though they're not, they resent the limitations this imposes on them and lose trust in the State.

Theme 5

To what extent are the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998 sufficient in safeguarding constitutional rights in relation to the collection and use of surveillance or personal data?

Response

No-one's written anything yet so just go ahead, delete this and get your word in first!

Notes

The punishments for breaking the Data Protection Act are insufficient to deter organisations from breaking them as in practice they often only result in a 'wrist slapping'. The citizen's right to privacy is often not considered the top priority. For example:

Theme 6

Is there a need for any additional constitutional protection of citizens in relation to the collection and use of surveillance material and personal data? If so, what form might such protection take?

Response

No-one's written anything yet so just go ahead, delete this and get your word in first!

Notes

A written constitution stating the citizen's right to privacy.