Musa Jalalzai - Intelligence Surveillance, Security Sector Reforms, Accountability Principles and National Security Challenges Within European Union

MUSA KHAN JALALZAI

Vij Books India Pvt Ltd

New Delhi (India)

Vij Books India Pvt Ltd

(Publishers, Distributors & Importers)

2/19, Ansari Road

Delhi 110 002

Phones: 91-11-43596460, 91-11-47340674

Mobile: 98110 94883

e-mail:

www.vijbooks.com

Copyright 2020, Author

ISBN: 978-81-94285-14-4 (Hardback)

ISBN: 978-81-94285-16-8 (ebook)

All rights reserved.

No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system,
transmitted or utilised in any form or by any means, electronic,
mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior
permission of the copyright owner. Application for such permission
should be addressed to the publisher.

Globalization, digitalization, and artificial intelligence technologies are fundamentally interconnected, while contemporary experts of intelligence surveillance are increasingly dependent on modern satellite and signal technology. Aggrandizement in modern technology and the interconnectedness of our world means that the information environment has manifested phenomenal growth. Over the last two decades, Denmark, France, Germany, Poland, Romania, Netherlands and the United Kingdom proposed different laws, measures and strategies that legalized the powers of interception communications mechanism. In a rapidly changing environment, Intelligence Surveillance developed through different types of technologies, software, strategies and drones operations in Europe and the United Kingdom. There are various forms of surveillance mechanism, including Human Agents, Computer Programs, and Global Positioning Satellite Devices in Vehicles, Cookies, Face-book, YouTube and Apps that diminished our privacy and family life. In yesteryears, way of interception communications dramatically changed and the aggrandizement of new technologies transformed the way individuals communicate with each other.

Barrister Angela Patrick, (Director of Human Rights Policy at JUSTICE) in her paper warned that surveillance fundamentally occurring without the knowledge of individuals being watched: Surveillance generally occurs without the knowledge of the individual being watched. Only in the limited circumstances when the information is used in a trial or when an authority acknowledges the surveillance will an individual be able to challenge its propriety. In these circumstances, the European Convention on Human Rights places a significant obligation on the State to ensure that

However, Dr Richard Clayton of Cambridge University explained importance of Internet and computer in his analytical paper. He also noted that governments interference in privacy is of great concern: Computers connected to the Internet are given a unique IP address and data packets are routed towards this IP address, so where there is direct two way communications it cannot be forged. The IP addresses are allocated to ISPs in contiguous blocks, so if it is necessary to determine who did that? then public records can be interrogated to determine which ISP was providing Internet service, and they can then consult their records to determine which customer was allocated the particular IP address at the relevant time. That information does not of course indicate whose fingers were on the keyboard, but it will clearly indicate where to look next or whose door to break down.

In a surveillance state, people live in consternation, fear, and struggling to protect their privacy, family life, business secrets and data. The TruePublica report (23 May 2019) has deeply highlighted social and financial affects of the UK surveillance mechanism. The report also noted concern of the European court of Human Rights that the UK government unlawfully obtains data from communications companies and didnt put in place safeguards around how it did it: Britain is a surveillance state, the worst in the democratic West. In a short period of time, it has amassed a rather sordid history of citizen surveillance and it continues to be unlawful. Last Septembers damning judgment of British security operations against its own people saw the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) rule that the government had unlawfully obtained data from communications companies and didnt put in place safeguards around how it did it. But what does the state really know about us and what about the future? Under Theresa May in the Home Office, the surveillance state became ever more paranoid. It became the most extreme surveillance architecture

Report of the TruePublica also noted weaknesses of the UK government to control its own security services for its illegal demonstration by different means: The state is so out of control its own security services were diverted away from external threats towards us law-abiding citizens. It was not long ago that MI5 and GCHQ were accused of infecting domestic civilian equipment with viruses so they could turn on TVs and mobile devices at will in peoples homes, they recorded conversations and took photos, hacked into iOS, Apple systems and Android equipment, encryption was circumvented even when it was specifically outlawed. Britains spy agencies worked with the American CIA and created more than 1,000 viruses and other types of malware to gain access to everyday items and either monitor or steal data. It is not known exactly how much information the state has gathered about its people.

However, the Guardian report (13 August 2019) highlighted role of CCTV and the use of Facial Recognition by the UK police to fight prevailing criminal culture effectively. The report also noted the use of Facial Recognition technology by private firms and landlords across the country: Arguments about surveillance and privacy are usually framed around Big Brother the overweening state. But the widespread use of facial recognition in private hands suggests a more urgent danger: that not just Big Brother but anyone in the family can watch, and profit from, our faces. The private landlords of the Kings Cross development in London are using facial recognition now in their CCTV surveillance. It is not clear whether this is entirely legal, partly because the owners have been reluctant to disclose what it is theyre actually doing. This is a development that looks like the worst of all possible worlds. Visual recognition boosted by AI is cheap, widely available and easily programmed one hobbyist has used it to train his cat flap to open

Big Brother Watch is consecutively running behind government and private agencies-using multifaceted surveillance against civilians. The organization prepared numerous important reports on privacy and human rights of the UK citizens, and still fighting the long war in all forums. In its recent report, (10 July 2019) Big Brother Watch has noted the hearing of the European Court of Human Rights on the UK mass surveillance: Today, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights heard Big Brother Watch & others case against mass surveillance practices by the UK government. The hearing saw Government lawyers defending bulk surveillance practices and admitting that even the courts confidential emails could be scooped up by UK intelligence agencies. The Government admitted that the purpose of bulk surveillance is not to search for the communications of identified targets but to gather mass data and decide who should be a target. Government lawyers revealed the UK intelligence agencies purpose for bulk surveillance powers is to search for unknown unknownsa widely-ridiculed phrase used by former US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to defend the lack of evidence for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq in 2002. The campaign groups argued that this is unlawful, as it cannot be considered necessary or proportionate in a democratic society and treats everyone as under suspicion. The UK Government also admitted to deploying automated rules and computerized searches to sift through billions of intercepted calls, texts, emails and internet records.