Where people may begin to self-censor their research

[Joywtome231]

Lawsuits that allow indiscriminate breaches of confidentiality can create a surveillance state, for fear of repression or legal consequences. Add to this poorly designed Cybersecurity Policies, created by presidential decree, and Internet management “Committees” and you get the idea of ​​the potential of this whole thing.

Allowing data from individuals not directly linked to a crime to be collected indiscriminately sets a dangerous precedent (where the victim is the investigator, the prosecutor, the judge, and the executioner all at once). This erodes privacy norms and opens the door to potential abuse.

International human rights standards, such as those set out in the Universal Declaration lebanon phone number library of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, provide that investigative measures must be proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued. Breaking the confidentiality of an indeterminate group of people violates this principle of proportionality.

In fact, would a new “status civitatis” be created, where a citizen will only be someone who unrestrictedly complies with the whims of the modern Suzerains or Dominus?

If we take the matter simply from the immediate aspect, we would already have the risk of discrimination, where data collected indiscriminately can be used for unfair profiling of individuals based on their online activities, places visited or searches carried out, even if there is no clear connection with any illicit activity.

When citizens feel that their basic rights are not protected by the state (which should be the foundation of its existence), this can lead to an erosion of trust in the justice system itself.

It is true that indiscriminate surveillance can change online behavior, where citizens may feel that free expression and the exchange of ideas, fundamental elements for a democratic (read: free) society, may not be working very well.