Brief History and Introduction of Privacy and Human Rights
From Article 21 of the Japan Constitution states, “Freedom of assembly and association as well as speech, press and all other forms of expression are guaranteed. No censorship shall be maintained, nor shall the secrecy of any means of communication be violated.” Article 35 states, “The right of all persons to be secure in their homes, papers and effects against entries, searches and seizures shall not be impaired except upon warrant issued for adequate cause and particularly describing the place to be searched and things to be seized . . . Each search or seizure shall be made upon separate warrant issued by a competent judicial officer.”1
A 1988 Act for the Protection of Computer Processed Personal Data Held by Administrative Organs governs the use of personal information in computerized files held by government agencies. It imposes duties of security, access, and correction. Agencies must limit their collection to relevant information and publish a public notice listing their file systems.
The Japanese government has followed a policy of self-regulation for the private sector, especially relating to electronic commerce. Essentially, there were no set privacy laws other than the general issues stated in the constitution, but when needed the Japanese government will intervene and regulate. In June of 1998, former Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto announced that he had signed an agreement with U.S. President Clinton for self-regulation for privacy measures on the Internet except for certain sensitive data. “If data in a certain industry is highly confidential, legal methods can be considered for that industry.”2
Several committees have been ...
... middle of paper ...
...s not safe. We need to take more time.”4
References
1 Constitution of Japan, November 3, 1946.
<http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/constitution_and_government_of_japan/constitution_e.html>
2 U.S. Japan Joint Statement on Electronic Commerce, May 15, 1998. <http://www.ecommerce.gov/usjapan.htm>
3 Japan: More Crime, Less Privacy, 2 Jun 1999, <http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,19973,00.html>
4 James Brooke, Japan in an Uproar as 'Big Brother' Computer File Kicks In, 5 Aug. 2002, <http://www.orbicom.uqam.ca/in_focus/news/archives/2002_aout/2002_aout_05.html>
5 Lies and Secrets: Japan's National ID Network Has Gone Live Already, 31 Jul. 2002, <http://www.questionsquestions.net/documents2/japan_id.html>
6 Japan ID System Raises Big Brother Fears, 5 Aug. 2002, <http://edition.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/east/08/04/japan.idcard/>
Imagine being watched by your own government every single second of the day with not even the bathroom, bedroom, kitchen and all the above to yourself. George Orwell’s 1984 is based on a totalitarian government where the party has complete access over the citizens thoughts to the point where anything they think they can access it, and control over the citizens actions, in a sense that they cannot perform what they really want to or else Big Brother, which is the name of the government in the book 1984, will “take matters into their own hands.” No one acts the same when they are being watched, as they do when they are completely alone.
Data Protection Act 1998: This is there to control and looks after your personal information. Everyone who uses and is able to access your personal information, there are ru...
2.Omar Saleem. Establishment of a U.S. Federal Data Protection Agency to Define and Regulate Internet Privacy and its Impact in U.S.-China Relations: Marco Polo Where Are You? The John Marshall Journal of Computer & Information Law. The John Marshall Law School. Fall 2000 [2]
Scrolling through my Facebook feed on my iPhone, casually looking at my friend’s pictures statuses and updates, I came across a video with an amusing title. I tapped the play button expecting the video to load. Instead, I was redirected to an app asking permission to access my “public information, pictures and more.” I then realized; what I considered to be “private information” was not private anymore. Privacy is becoming slowly nonexistent, due to the invasion of advertising companies and the information we publicly post in the online world. In the essay “The Piracy of Privacy: Why Marketers Must Bare Our Souls” by Allen D. Kanner remarks, how major companies such as Google, Yahoo and Microsoft get billions of transmissions each year on
The United States government is up to its ears in the personal information it has collected from its citizens. Americans are becoming increasingly “aware of these slowly eroding walls of privacy,”(Hirsh) and more than half polled admit concern “about the overall accumulation of personal information about them “by […] law enforcement, government, […] and other groups,” though “they accept it as an unavoidable modern phenomenon” (Hirsh). The question is, how far is too far to trust the government with the collection, proper storage, and usage of this information? Studies show that “Americans believe that business, government, social-media sites, and other groups are accessing their most personal information without their consent” (Hirsh). People should be given the ability to admit or deny access to their personal information. The government does not have a right to use whatever information it wants for any purpose it wishes. Michael Hayden, once the NSA director for seven years, says, “Even I recognize that it's one thing for Google to know too much, because they aren't putting me in jail. It's another thing for government, because they can coerce me” (Hirsh). The United States government's ability to collect information about its citizens and residents should be restricted by what kind of information it can take, how it can acquire it, and what it can use it for.
Civil liberties is a term coined by the United States that guarantees certain rights to the people by the Bill of Rights. Although the Right to Privacy is not officially enumerated into the Constitution, the Supreme Court ruled that citizens do in fact, have the right to their own privacy in their own home and their own beliefs. Privacy rights are an essential part of everyday American lives, in that everyone should be given the right to do whatever they want to do in privacy without anyone judging them or knowing what they have done. The right to privacy can also be considered jeopardizing to society because if someone is doing everything privately, including planning some sort of abomination or is doing something illegal, and the police does not find out, it can cause some serious damage to the society. The Patriot Act was enacted after 9-11 to ensure security among the nation. By doing so, the United States implemented strategies in protecting the people, such as decrease privacy rights that were “given” to the people. Also, in today’s society, iphones have an a setting in which the phone can track your location and so-call “help” you do whatever you need the phone to do. According to the Usatoday’s article, location services through GPS coordinates one’s online post and photos, in that one does not even know they are exposing their private lives to the online world. Although, The right to privacy plays an important role in keeping everyday Americans the will to do whatever they want in private, it may cause potential trouble in keeping everything a secret, even illegal actions.
Privacy is one of the severe issue in today’s Modern Technology era, tied to human right around the world. Most countries have started thinking differently regarding between the people’s right and national security, and trying to leverage on new technology to detect potential national threats without hurting people’s privacy. However, there's a blurred line between privacy violation and government surveillance. (Sánchez, Levin & Del, 2012) It would be a learning process for governments to seek an optimum balance between retain integrity of privacy right and eliminate national threats in order to make the country better.
Don’t put it on the internet, although I guess some people would! “Don Tapscott can see the future coming ... and works to identify the new concepts we need to understand in a world transformed by the Internet.” (“Don Tapscott” Ted Conferences LLC) Tapscott is an Adjunct Professor of Management at the Rotman School of Management and the Inaugural Fellow at the Martin Prosperity Institute. In 2013, Tapscott was appointed Chancellor of Trent University. He has written extensively on the topic of information security in the digital age over the past fifteen years. In his essay entitled, “Should We Ditch the Idea of Privacy?”(Tapscott p.117). Tapscott considers a new, emerging theory
Japan, known as Nippon to its natives, is known for its exotic and captivating culture. Tokyo, its highest metropolitan area alone, is a sight to see. That is not what will be discussed in this essay though. Modeled after the European Civil law, but highly influenced by American legal traditions, Japan’s Criminal Justice System is intriguing to read about. Puzzled by the American influence? Japan’s defeat in World War II brought major change to the country, resulting in a Constitution much similar to the U.S. with three branches of government.
Technology has developed in leaps and bounds over the past few decades. The case is that the law always has difficulty keeping pace with new issues and technology and the few laws that are enacted are usually very general and obsucre. The main topic of this paper is to address the effect of technology on privacy in the workplace. We have to have an understanding of privacy before trying to protect it. Based on the Gift of Fire, privacy has three pieces: freedom from intrusion, control of information about one's self, and freedom from surveillance.1 People's rights has always been protected by the constitution such as the Fourth Amendment, which protects people from "unreasonable searches and seizures". As said by Eric Hughes, "Privacy is the power to selectively reveal oneself to the world."2 As written by Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis in 1928 is the right most valued by the American people was "the right to be left alone."3
Although the right to privacy has been used to sway the outcome of many U.S court cases, including the famous Supreme Court ruling of Roe vs. Wade, there is still some debate over how the “right to privacy” should be viewed. For example both Judith Jarvis Thompson, and James Rachels agree that the right to privacy is indeed a right that is bestowed upon citizens, however their perception of how one is granted this right is quite different.
The privacy of the individual is the most important right. Without privacy, the democratic system that we know would not exist. Privacy is one of the fundamental values on which our country was founded. There are exceptions to privacy rights that are created by the need for defense and security.
With continuing revelations of government surveillance, much has been said about the “trade-off” between privacy and security and finding the “right balance” between the two. As Michael Lynch, a professor of philosophy at the University of Connecticut, wrote in an opinion piece in the New York Times, “this way of framing the issue makes sense if [one] understand[s] privacy solely as a political or legal concept.” In this context, the loss of privacy might seem to be a small price to pay to ensure one's safety. However, the relevance of privacy extends far beyond the political and legal sphere. Privacy – or the lack thereof – affects all aspects of one's life; it is a state of human experience. In this sense, privacy, from the symbolic interactionist position that the self is created through social interaction, is a necessary precondition for the creation and preservation of the self. The “self” entails personhood, autonomy, and identity.
Stone, Lieutenant Colonel Evan M. "The Invasion of Privacy Act: The Disclosure of My Information in Your Government File." Widener Law Review 19.2 (2013): 345-385. Academic Search Complete. Web. 6 Apr. 2014.
With the controversy of intrusion of privacy, this has forced various governments to make laws and clarifications of laws in multiple countries. For example,