In our digital world, some controversy exists over whether or not the government should have access to our personal communication. While it is argued by some that the state should automatically be able to obtain this information in the interests of national security, others believe it to be an unnecessary invasion of privacy which should not be allowed. I do not believe that the issue is so clear-cut.
On the one hand, many believe that, in the current global and digital climate, the availability of records of our personal messages to security services and governments is an essential tool in the fight against cybercrime, terrorism and fraud. By having access to these records, crimes can be pre-empted and, with the intelligence gathered by national security systems, potential suspects can be identified, minimising the occurrence of similar future crime. Those who favour this side of the argument would consider this to be a necessary consequence of a digital world.
However, on the other hand, there are those who maintain that technological advances should not compromise our right to privacy. Those who are against the sharing of our personal information with the authorities would argue this right must be protected in the same way handwritten letters or personal face-to-face conversations are private. This group is of the opinion that, by allowing the authorities access to our private conversations, we may be manipulated or misrepresented by the state. A prime example of this could be the misinterpretation of an innocent message, which resulted in fines or penalties for the author.
In conclusion, the protection of our nation’s safety should be equally prioritised with that of our civil right to privacy. Though a controversial and difficult balance to obtain in legislation, some compromise by each side should result in a fair system for all.