While it is clear that the government is responsible for our public safety, some in the community think that gives them the right to access personal messages and mobile records. However, the state should not be able to view private information without the consent of its citizens.
Government surveilance has its uses. For example, the Terror Act of 2003 was instrumental in the prevention of numerous crimes and disasters. This would not have been possible without the government having access to messaging records, as well as mobile call logs. Also, it could be argued that good citizens with no intention of committing crimes should have nothing to fear. Ultimately, their innocence is the best defense, and thus, they should have no problem with members of the police viewing their private messages.
By contrast, access to our personal and sensitive data is in infringement of our freedoms. People’s privacy is very important to them, and the state having access to all their personal messages violates that sacred right. Furthermore, the belief that those with nothing to hide should be welcoming to this form of government overeach, is based on an often incorrect presumtion that governments always act in the best interest of the public. A fact proven wrong in many instances, where the leaders of dictatorial nations have used phone records to catch and imprison political opponents, seeking only to further their own personal interest; this was to the detriment of the general public.
In conclusion, though there are safety benefits to governments being able to access mobile phone records and messages, the privacy of a nation’s citizens is of more importance.