Security services after the terrorist attacks in the US and Europe. Patriot Act versus the Retention Directive, or the legitimisation of abuses in the sphere of privacy in democratic states: a comparative study
pdf

How to Cite

Rogala-Lewicki, A. (2015). Security services after the terrorist attacks in the US and Europe. Patriot Act versus the Retention Directive, or the legitimisation of abuses in the sphere of privacy in democratic states: a comparative study. Economic and Political Thought, 50(3). Retrieved from https://mysl.lazarski.pl/mysl/article/view/1746

Abstract

Acceleration of technologisation processes, networking of communication,
and in consequences it social interactions, resulted in a shift of social,
economic and political paradigm in the civilisation sphere. For the purpose
of anticipation of an increasing of more and more sophisticated threats,
state law enforcement and intelligence agencies developed and implemented
new technologies to allow secret services not only maintain raison d’être but
also to preserve and expand assets. And so the existence of American system
Echelon or the revealed by Edward Snowden PRISM platform opened
public eyes to the fact that the intelligence agencies (in particular, the US
National Security Agency) are not only able to capture any tele-information
signal but actually takes advantage of this privilege. Despite these attributes,
due to administrative and logistical shortcomings, secret services did
not avoid the embarrassment associated with effectively carried out terrorist
attacks. Paradoxically, instead of diagnosing the errors within the structures,
public sector responded in, previously unknown in democratic countries,
increasing the competences of the security forces, de facto legalizing almost
total surveillance. Symbolic examples are extremely controversial provisions

of the Patriot Act in the US and the EU Retention Directive. As a consequence,
the fight against terrorism has become an excuse for blunt violation
of standards related to privacy.

pdf