Science and Technology to fight crime breaches personal privacy
In recent years, there has been an increasing use of science and technology to fight crime in all over the world. It is widely believed that modern equipment has a huge effect to identify the victims. Many countries has been using several type of technique to protect the crime such as; Monitoring, Database (Including DNA databases), Biometrics, Fingerprint. This skill is modifying itself day after day by science and technology. Almost 64 old crimes has detected by DNA test of the United Kingdom in 2007 (http://www.4ni.co.uk/northern_ireland_news.asp?id=22798), on the other hand a number of people also faced some of their privacy problem. For this reason, there are a lot of debates about the proper utilization of modern technology in crime sector. Although some people say that technology has been protecting crime, a number of people think that the authority cannot maintain properly to protect their personal privacy by science. Professor Paul Schwartz believes that, we need to protect data in telecommunication field, so, his recent article he include, “Notification of Data Security Breaches" (http://www.law.berkeley.edu/php-programs/faculty/facultyProfile.php?facID=5517). Later when this essay will study about the wrong judgement by modern science and latest technology then it may be possible the people will also agree with Professor Paul Schwartz. However, this essay will examine two opposing viewpoints; one hand is that, increased use of science and technology to fight crime breaches personal privacy, on the other hand the necessity of this technique to discover the crime history.
Science and Technology have been making simple to identify the victim around the law and Oder, but they also have been showing negative effect on people’s personal privacy. Firstly, police man can find out easily the victim’s position by monitoring such as; CCTV and Mobile user devices, on the other hand sometimes these are not give any respect to the rules of Human Rights Act 1998 - Article 8 where gives to mention that everyone has the right to respect of private and family life (http://www.opsi.gov.uk/ACTS/acts1998/ukpga_19980042_en_3). For example, in 1995, Geoff Peck was trying to cut his wrists in a suicide attempt, and the council in the town centre of Brentwood was taking this scene by CCTV. Next day they released this footage of his action to the media. That time, he was totally surprised and so, he was going to the European Court of Human Rights because without his knowledge, the council released his image (http://www.spiked-online.com/Printable/00000002D150.htm). Richard Thomas also mention his Researchers highlight "dataveillance", in mobile phone and CCTV (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6108496.stm).Therefore, it is necessary to maintain a standards in order to continue to protect the privacy of the public in the monitoring field.
Reference:
http://www.4ni.co.uk/northern_ireland_news.asp?id=22798
http://www.law.berkeley.edu/php-programs/faculty/facultyProfile.php?facID=5517
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/ACTS/acts1998/ukpga_19980042_en_3
http://www.spiked-online.com/Printable/00000002D150.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment