Shielding Privacy in the Surveillance Era

A Comparative Study of India, USA and South Africa

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26512/lstr.v16i2.51916

Keywords:

Surveillance. Panopticon Model. Pegasus. Snowden Revelations. Privacy.

Abstract

[Purpose] The right to privacy has been gravely undermined in the pretence of “protecting national security and safety”. Although the idea of privacy has been around for a while, it has only recently come to be acknowledged as a human right. The researchers have juxtaposed the jurisprudence developed surrounding privacy in India with that of South Africa and the United States to analyse its evolution and conceptualisation.

[Methodology] Comparative analysis, judgment analysis, deductive method and critical analysis have been adopted by the researchers.

[Findings] It was deduced that on comparison of the three nations, South African premise of privacy is significantly stringent when compared to the other two countries i.e. India and US.

[Practical Implications] The debate that commenced years ago is still going robust and revolves around whether the “right to privacy” of an individual should be prioritised before the state's utilitarianism. The Indian, American and South African governments have "valid" concerns about public safety and national security. However, the government must understand that protection must not come at the expense of the fundamental right to privacy or as a matter of fact any other human rights, especially when they are arbitrary.  Obtaining access to personal data can be exploited for nefarious and arbitrary reasons under the pretence of national security. Upon analysis, it can be deducted that on comparision of the three nations, South African conceptualisation of the premise of privacy is significantly stringent when compared to the other two countries i.e India and US. US’s structure and premise of privacy in the surveillance era looked weaker when compared to India and South Africa. India’s tenents of the same can be positioned in the centre of spectrum/scale. The article further elucidates how Pegasus and Snowden revelations reveal the weak conceptualisation of privacy in US.

[Originality] There are various instances where the data is being used to monitor “targeted” people like journalists, activists and used to “silence” them. In reality, a targeted monitoring programme in accordance with global human-rights norms may be used to better address security risks like terrorism. This conceptualization of “silencing surveillance” is the original work of the researchers.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Stency Mariya Mark, Dayananda Sagar University

Assistant Professor at Dayananda Sagar University, Bengaluru, India, markstencymariya@gmail.com.

Aaratrika Pandey, Manav Rachna University, Faridabad, India

Assistant Professor of Law, Manav Rachna University, Faridabad, India, pandeyaaratrika0003@gmail.com.

References

AmaBhungane Centre for Investigative Journalism NPC and another v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Others; Minister of Police v AmaBhungane Centre for Investigative Journalism NPC and Others 2021 (3) SA 246 (CC).

Austin, LM (2015). ‘Lawful Illegality: What Snowden Has Taught us About the Legal Infrastructure of the Surveillance State’ in Michael Geist (ed.), Law, Privacy and Surveillance in Canada in the Post-Snowden Era, University of Ottawa Press.

Bajoria, J (2014) ‘India’s Snooping and Snowden’, Human Rights Watch, June 5, viewed 13 October, <https://www.hrw.org/news/2014/06/05/indias-snooping-and-snowden>.

Balkin, JM (2008) ‘The Constitution in the National Surveillance State’, Minnesota Law Review, Vol. 93, No. 1, pp. 1-25, .

Bentham, Jeremy (1791) ‘Panopticon: The Inspection House’. T Payne.

Bernal, P (2016) ‘Data gathering, surveillance and human rights: recasting the debate’, Journal of Cyber Policy, vol.1, no. 2, pp. 243-264, viewed 19 November, 2022 .

Bernstein v Bester NO 1996 (2) SA 751 (CC).

Boadle, A and Brito, R (2020) ‘Brazil prosecutors charge The Intercept's Greenwald with hacking’ Reuters, January 21, viewed 19 November 2022 <https://www.reuters.com/article/brazil-corruption-greenwald-idUKL1N29Q0SD>

Buthelezi, MC (2013) ‘Let false light (publicity) shine forth in South African law’, De Jure, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 783-797, < http://www.scielo.org.za/pdf/dejure/v46n3/08.pdf>

Coyne, H (2019) ‘The Untold Story of Edward Snowden’s Impact on the GDPR’, Cyber Defense Review, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 65-79, <https://cyberdefensereview.army.mil/Portals/6/Documents/CDR%20Journal%20Articles/Fall%202019/CDR%20V4N2-Fall%202019_COYNE.pdf?ver=2019-11-15-104104-157>.

Dimich, A. et. al. (2022). ‘Collection and Use of Information by Counter-Intelligence in the Context of Human Rights Protection’, The Age of Human Rights Journal, No. 18, pp. 445–461, <https://revistaselectronicas.ujaen.es/index.php/TAHRJ/article/view/6779>.

Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization 142 S. Ct. 2228 (2022).

Duggal, P (2018) ‘Cyber Law 3.0: An Exhaustive Section Wise Commentary on The Information Technology Act Along with Rules, Regulations, Policies, Notifications Etc’ 2nd edn. LexisNexis.

Edgar, TH (2017) ‘Beyond Snowden: Privacy, Mass Surveillance, and the Struggle to Reform the NSA’. Brookings Institution Press.

Foucault, M (1977) ‘Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison’. Random House Inc.

Franks, MA (2017) ‘Democratic Surveillance’, Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, vol. 30, no. 2, p. 425-489, accessed 26 September 2022.

Greenwald, G ‘Glenn Greenwald: detaining my partner was a failed attempt at intimidation’, The Guardian, August 19, viewed 19 November 2022, < https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/18/david-miranda-detained-uk-nsa> .

Greenwald, G and MacAskill, E, (2013) ‘NSA Prism program taps in to user data of Apple, Google and others’ The Guardian, 7 June, viewed 13 October 2022 <https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-nsa-data>.

Greenwald, G and Saxena, S (2013) ‘India among top targets of spying by NSA’ The Hindu, 23 September, viewed 13 October 2022, < https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/india-among-top-targets-of-spying-by-nsa/article5157526.ece>

Hirshleifer, J (1980) ‘Privacy: Its Origin, Function, and Future’, The Journal of Legal Studies, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 649-664, https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/467659

Human Rights Committee, ‘The Right to Privacy in South Africa’, 116th Session, 2016, pp. 1-8, viewed 13 October, 2022 <https://privacyinternational.org/sites/default/files/2017-12/HRC_SouthAfrica_0.pdf>.

Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors. (2017) SCC OnLine SC 996, para 185.

Justice Mavedzenge, A (2020) ‘The Right to Privacy v National Security in Africa: Towards a Legislative Framework which Guarantees Proportionality in Communications Surveillance’, African Journal of Legal Studies, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 360-390 <https://rm.coe.int/privacy-v-national-security-in-africa-justice-alfred-mavedzenge-2749-3/1680a1a510>

Kaldani, T& Prokopets, Z (2022) ‘Pegasus Sypware and its impact on Human Rights’ Council of Europe <https://rm.coe.int/pegasus-spyware-report-en/1680a6f5d8>.

Katz v. United States (1967) 389 U.S. 347.

Kaur, N 2018, ‘Right to Privacy in the United States of America’, The Leaflet, 28 May, viewed 07 October 2022,<https://theleaflet.in/specialissues/right-to-privacy-in-the-united-states-of-america-by-nehmat-kaur/#:~:text=The%20right%20to%20privacy%20with,penumbras'%20of%20the%20Fourteenth%20Amendment>.

Kharak Singh v State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors (1963) AIR 1295, para 17.

Kirchgaessner, S, Lewis, P, Pegg, D, Cutler, S, Lakhani, N and Safi, M, (2021) ‘Revealed: leak uncovers global abuse of cyber-surveillance weapon’, The Guardian, July 18, viewed 19 November, 2022 <https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/18/revealed-leak-uncovers-global-abuse-of-cyber-surveillance-weapon-nso-group-pegasus>.

Konvitz, MR (1966) ‘Privacy and the Law: A Philosophical Prelude’, Law and Contemporary Problems, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 272-280, https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3108&context=lcp.

Kramer, I R (1990) ‘The Birth of Privacy Law: A Century since Warren and Brandeis ‘, Catholic University Law Review, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 703-724, <https://scholarship.law.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1818&context=lawreview>

Kurup, D (2013) ‘In the dark about ‘India’s Prism’, The Hindu, June 16, viewed 19 November, 2022, <https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/in-the-dark-about-indias-prism/article4817903.ece> .

Kwoka, MB (2015) ‘Leaking and Legitimacy’, UC Davis Law Review, vol. 48, pp. 1387- 1456, .

Locke, J (1947) ‘Two Treaties of Government’. Hafner Publishing Company.

Londoño, E and Casado, L(2020) ‘Glenn Greenwald Charged With Cybercrimes in Brazil’, The New York Times, January 22, viewed 20 November, 2022 < https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/21/world/americas/glenn-greenwald-brazil-cybercrimes.html>

M P Sharma and Others v. Satish Chandra, District Magistrate & Others (1954) AIR 300.

Manohar Lal Sharma v Union of India, WRIT PETITION (CRL.) NO. 314 OF 2021.

Marczak, B, Railton, JS, McKune, S, Razzak, BA and Deibert, R (2018) ‘Hide and Seek: Tracking NSO Group’s Pegasus Spyware to Operations in 45 Countries’, Citizen Lab Research, Report No. 113, University of Toronto, September 18 <https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/95391/1/Report%23113--hide%20and%20seek.pdf>

McMullan, T 2015 ‘What does the panopticon mean in the age of digital surveillance?’, The Guardian, 23 July, viewed 02 October 2022 <https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jul/23/panopticon-digital-surveillance-jeremy-bentham>.

Milanovic, M (2015) ‘Human Rights Treaties and Foreign Surveillance: Privacy in the Digital Age’, Harvard International Law Journal, Vol. 56, No. 1, pp. 81-146, .

Mills, A (2019) ‘Now You See Me – Now You Don't: Journalists’ Experiences With Surveillance’, Journalism Practise, Vol. 13, No. 6, pp. 690-707, < https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/17512786.2018.1555006>.

Naithani, P (2021) ‘Pegasus and the Law’, Economic & Political Weekly, Vol. 56, No. 49, < https://www.epw.in/journal/2021/49/letters/pegasus-and-law.html>.

O’Keeffe v Argus Printing and Publishing Co Ltd., 1954 (3) SA 244 (C).

Olmstead v. United States (1928) 277 U.S. 438.

Parikesit, B & Yudithadewi, D (2020) ‘The Impact of Surveillance on Journalist Activism’, UNES Journal of Social and Economics Research, Vol. 47, No. 2, pp. 55-63,<https://www.researchgate.net/publication/354778446_The_Impact_of_Surveillance_on_Journalist_Activism>.

People’s Union of Civil Liberties (PUCL) & Anr v. Union of India & Anr (1997) 1 SCC 301.

Perrigo, B(2021) ‘Governments Used Spyware to Surveil Journalists and Activists. Here’s Why Revelations About Pegasus Are Shaking Up the World’, Time, July 19, viewed 19 November 2022, <https://time.com/6081433/pegasus-spyware-monitored-journalists-activists/>.

Planned Parenthood v. Casey, (1992) 505 U.S. 833.

R. v. Dyment, (1988) 2 SCR. 417, para 17.

Rajan, N (2021) ‘Explained: Pegasus uses ‘zero-click attack’ spyware; what is this method?’, Indian Express, 3 August, viewed 19 November, 2022 < https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/zero-click-attacks-pegasus-spyware-7411302/>

Richards, NM (2013) ‘The Dangers of Surveillance’, Harvard Law Review, vol. 126, no. 7, pp. 1934- 1965, https://harvardlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/vol126_richards.pdf.

Roberts, T et. al. (2021) ‘Surveillance Law in Africa: A review of six countries’, Institute of Development Studies < https://iapp.org/media/pdf/resource_center/surveillance_law_in_africa_review_of_six_countries.pdf>

Roe v. Wade, (1973) 410 U.S. 113

Rogers & Eden, (2017) ‘The Snowden Disclosures, Technical Standards, and the Making of Surveillance Infrastructures’, International Journal of Communication, vol. 11, pp. 802-823, .

Rozenshtein, AZ (2018) ‘Surveillance Intermediaries’, Stanford Law Review, vol. 70, no. 1, pp. 99-189, <https://review.law.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2018/01/70-Stan.-L.-Rev.-99.pdf>.

Shilliam, R (2022) ‘Foundations of International Relations’. Bloomsbury Publishing.

Stakeholder Report Universal Periodic 27th Session: The Right to Privacy in South Africa <https://privacyinternational.org/sites/default/files/2018-04/South%20Africa_UPR_Stakeholder%20Report_Right%20to%20Privacy.pdf>.

Stanley v. Georgia, (1969) 394 U.S. 557.

Targowski, A (2021) The Strategies of Informing Technology in the 21st Century. IGI Global.

Tariq, J (2013) ‘The NSA's PRISM Program and the New EU Privacy Regulation: Why U.S. Companies with a Presence in the EU could be in Trouble’, American University Business Law Review, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 371- 389, < https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3156725>

Thaorey, P (2019) ‘Informational Privacy: Legal Introspection in India’. ILI Law Review. Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 160-179, https://ili.ac.in/pdf/pt.pdf

The Holy Bible (2013) Genesis 3:7. Intellectual Reserve, Inc.

Wacks, R (2015) ‘Privacy: A very Short Introduction’. Oxford University Press. 2nd ed.

Watt, E (2017) ‘The Role of International Human Rights Law in the Protection of Online Privacy in the Age of Surveillance’ 9th International Conference on Cyber Conflict (CyCon), viewed 21 November 2022, <https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8240330/metrics#metrics>.

Wet, PD and Fairweather, A, (2013) ‘Spying far worse in South Africa than the US’, Mail & Guardian, 14 June, viewed 13 October 2022 <https://mg.co.za/article/2013-06-14-00-spying-far-worse-in-south-africa/>.

Završnik, A & Levičnik, P (2015) ‘The Public Perception of Cyber Surveillance Before and After Edward Snowden’s Surveillance Revelations’, Masaryk University Journal Law Technology, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 33-58,

Downloads

Published

2024-10-16

How to Cite

MARIYA MARK, Stency; PANDEY, Aaratrika. Shielding Privacy in the Surveillance Era: A Comparative Study of India, USA and South Africa. Law, State and Telecommunications Review, [S. l.], v. 16, n. 2, p. 215–235, 2024. DOI: 10.26512/lstr.v16i2.51916. Disponível em: https://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/RDET/article/view/51916. Acesso em: 16 oct. 2024.