Government snooping would be best

the Government has asked of us faced with a choice that's about more than e-service needs to read other people's mail. We will have a society where the government gets access to all private rooms in our lives, ask John O. Egeland.

Proposal for a new law about the Defence intelligence service has been out for consultation. The document is 395 pages of complex law and the deadline was short. The purpose is obvious: It applies to drag the law through the required formalities as quickly as possible, and preferably with a low noise level. After all, it's largely about providing the e-service legal basis for a practice that already pushes the existing laws and rules. Electronic masseovervåking is a natural step forward.

In addition, the high speed and political harmony necessary for the government's doubles get the least possible attention. On page 23 in the political platform from Granavolden goes flag to the top for a wide range of privacy and for "the individual's right to rule over their own private information". On page 101, the government will "allow the obtaining of cross-border electronic information", and therefore that which now exists as a bill. The left takes subject to possible dissent when the case comes to treatment.

So far, it has not gone the government's way. In these shotguns it with criticism, and it is not anyone who believes the law must be postponed, modified or should be scrapped. Among these we find the director of public prosecutions, the Parliamentary kontrollutvalg for the secret services, the bar association, the Inspectorate, the Police security service (PST), presseorganisasjonene, Telenor and Telia. Here is a small selection of views that has occurred in the during the consultation round:

At several points contrary to the bill against The european convention on human rights and the challenge, therefore, the Constitution.It added up to a masseovervåking which is something new in Norway. It is inexcusable that such an extensive and restrictive legal measures, with major consequences for privacy and the rule of law for all the people, should be treated with as short a høringsfrist.De proposed rules for the collection of data is all-encompassing, the objectives are too vague, and the preconditions for independent control is not present.The rules on secret surveillance of rooms and person - and the lack of protection confidentiality between lawyer and client, the press and the sources - are in conflict with the provisions of EMK.De ordinary demands clarity and predictability in a law text is not fulfilled.The draft contains a general and unlimited impunity for actions taken by legal service and oppdragshandlinger. After the wording in the draft will all types of offences, even murder, could fall within the straffriheten.De proposed kontrollmekanismene is too weak and leaves too much of the real control to the e-service.

It is probable that bråttsjøene of criticism will lead to some changes in the law about e-service. But the biggest questions will probably be lying in the hooks. Are there alternatives to masseovervåking in terrorens time? Will the increase in security take place, and it will stand in a reasonable relation to the damage it entails? We are ready to withstand the chilling of public debate, greater mistrust between the people and the monitors and suspicion? Is our right to freedom and privacy more important than that of hush-the people get to look for the pin in a haystack of information?

These questions need to be set and we must spend time to find the answers. The secret services ' methods and scope are developed step by step. Each step may appear to be well-founded, but does not provide understanding of the long-term impact. Parliament adopts overvåkingssamfunnet bit for bit. Now the elected representatives are invited to cross a fundamental limit: the Intervention in the privacy of almost everyone in the Uk, without there being any rise or suspicion.

In this situation is it a good idea to wait until we have a better basis for decision making than that provided by the state juristeri and political pirouettes. The government must be pressured to quickly get the renal the approved Personvernkommisjonen. It will provide important information about the effects of the overall effect that public and private monitoring and control means. Moreover, the progress of the clarifications about masseovervåkingens legal limits in The european court of human rights (ECHR).

There is much at stake . Not least maktforholdet between the individual and the state. As the philosopher Immanuel Kant observed: "In the being is also its abuse."