Privacy and Democracy: Protecting Journalists &

Transcript:Privacy and Democracy: Protecting Journalists &:
Privacy and Democracy: Protecting Journalists & the Political Opposition from Abuse of Power Peter Swire Professor, Georgia Institute of Technology Research Director, Cross-Border Data Forum Venice Privacy Symposium June 10, 2024 Our panel today on Privacy and Democracy Many discussions of privacy as an individual right My focus – privacy also as a structural safeguard of democracy Checks and balances against abuse by temporary leaders of a democracy Reduce risk of slide from democracy to authoritarianism To do this, consider Special privacy protections against surveillance on the political opposition Also, for journalists, to ensure free speech and potential for dissent Also, Freedom of Information, to reduce secrecy of the temporarily-elected leaders Historically, we have seen such protections in wake of scandals Going forward, we should be alert to the importance of continuing to build these structural protections, often tailored to the particular democracy Overview Currently Professor of Law & Ethics at Georgia Tech, Atlanta Georgia USA Research Director, Cross-Border Data Forum Previously Trained in law and political philosophy Chief Counselor for Privacy, U.S. Office of Management & Budget (1999-2001) Member, President’s NSA Review Group, after Snowden “Liberty and Security in a Changing World” (2013) Swire background “The modern totalitarian state relies on secrecy for the regime, but high surveillance and disclosure for all other groups. With their demand for a. complete commitment of loyalties to the regime, the literature of both fascism and communism traditionally attacks the idea of privacy as “immoral,” antisocial” and “part of the cult of individualism”. This attitude is most strongly expressed in the consolidation phase of a new totalitarian regime. Autonomous units are denied privacy, traditional confidential relationships are destroyed, surveillance systems and informers are widely installed, and thorough dossiers are compiled on millions of citizens.” “A balance that ensures strong citadels of individual and group privacy and limits both disclosure and surveillance is a prerequisite for liberal democratic societies.” Westin “Privacy and Freedom” (1968) US Supreme Court in Keith (1972): “History abundantly documents the tendency of Government – however benevolent and benign its motive – to view with suspicion those who most fervently dispute its policies. Fourth Amendment protections become the more necessary when the targets of official surveillance may be those suspected of unorthodoxy in their political beliefs” After Snowden, NSA Review Group said FISA’s stricter limits on domestic surveillance express: “not only a respect for individual privacy, but also – and fundamentally