Security and Privacy: Global Standards for Ethical Identity Management in Contemporary Liberal Democratic States

304 Pages·2011·1.372 MB·English

by  John Kleinig & Peter Mameli & Seumas Miller & Douglas Salane & Adina Schwartz

SECURITY PRIVACY
and

SECURITY PRIVACY
and
Global Standards for Ethical Identity Management
in Contemporary Liberal Democratic States
John Kleinig • Peter Mameli • Seumas Miller • Douglas Salane
Adina Schwartz
THE AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY
E PRESS

Centre for
Applied Philosophy
Public Ethics
and
An Australian Research Council Funded Special Research Centre
Practical Ethics and Public Policy Monograph 2
Series Editor: Michael J. Selgelid
E PRESS
Published by ANU E Press
The Australian National University
Canberra ACT 0200, Australia
Email: [email protected]
This title is also available online at http://epress.anu.edu.au
National Library of Australia Cataloguing-in-Publication entry

Title: Security and privacy : global standards for ethical
identity management in contemporary
liberal democratic states / John Kleinig ... [et al.]
ISBN: 9781921862571 (pbk.) 9781921862588 (ebook)
Notes: Includes bibliographical references.
Subjects: Terrorism--Moral and ethical aspects.
Transnational crime--Moral and ethical aspects.
Terrorism--Political aspects.
Transnational crime--Political aspects.
Other Authors/Contributors:
Kleinig, John, 1942-
Dewey Number: 363.325
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system
or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise,
without the prior permission of the publisher.
Cover design and layout by ANU E Press
Printed by Griffin Press
This edition © 2011 ANU E Press
Contents
Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii
Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi
I . Crime Scenes and the Terroir of Terror . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
II . Security and the Challenge to Liberal Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
III . The Blessing and Bane of the Liberal Democratic Tradition . . . . . . 11
IV . Divergent Formalities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
V . When the Rubber Hits the Road . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
VI . Securitization Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
VII . Surveillance Technologies and Economies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
VIII . The Underlying Values and their Alignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
IX . The Complexities of Oversight and Accountability . . . . . . . . . . 225
X . Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241
Appendix: Security and Privacy Institutional Arrangements:
Australia and India . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263
v

Preface
This study is principally concerned with the ethical dimensions of identity
management technology – electronic surveillance, the mining of personal data,
and profiling – in the context of transnational crime and global terrorism. The
ethical challenge at the heart of this study is to establish an acceptable and
sustainable equilibrium between two central moral values in contemporary
liberal democracies, namely, security and privacy. Both values are essential
to individual liberty but they come into conflict in times when civil order is
threatened, as has been the case from late in the twentieth century, with the
advent of global terrorism and transnational crime.
We seek to articulate legally sustainable, politically possible and technologically
feasible global ethical standards1 for identity management technology and
policies in liberal democracies in the contemporary global security context.
Although the standards in question are to be understood as global ethical
standards potentially to be adopted not only by the United States (US) but also
by the European Union (EU), India, Australasia and other contemporary liberal
democratic states, we take as our primary focus the tensions that have arisen
between the US and the EU.
This tension provides a good example of the kinds of challenges involved in
developing global standards. It is exemplified by the 2006 disclosure concerning
the US government’s access to SWIFT transactions and the controversy that
has followed it, as well as the earlier and ongoing controversy over the 2004
US–EU Passenger Names Records (PNR) agreement. It also makes itself known
in the ongoing debate over national identity cards. The first two conflicts
make it clear that, however difficult it may be to develop global standards for
the management of personal data, such standards are needed and that every
effort should be made to develop them or at least to implement procedures for
addressing conflicts among them.
Naturally, authoritarian states do not share the liberal values underlying this
project – values such as individual autonomy and privacy. Nevertheless, to the
extent that such authoritarian states are evolving or are likely to evolve toward
some form of liberal democracy, the results of this study will also be relevant to
these states. Our purpose is to articulate standards and institutional initiatives
that are sufficiently specific to determine – or at least substantially constrain –
the requisite detailed security and privacy policies and prescriptions in national
as well as international and transnational jurisdictions.
1 Gijs de Vries, “Terrorism, Islam and Democracy”, EurActiv.com, March 4, 2005, at: http://www.euractiv.
com/en/security/gijs-vries-terrorism-islam-democracy/article-136245.
vii
Security and Privacy
The project distinguishes itself from other work in this field in two major
respects. Firstly, the multi-disciplinary team of experts brought together for
this project has enabled the integration of: (a) ethical principles, (b) national
and international legal considerations, (c) effective law enforcement practices,
(d) oversight and accountability concerns and (e) knowledge of existing and
emerging technology, such as database mining and knowledge discovery
technology, in the development of a framework of determinate and feasible
ethical standards for identity management technology in the global security
context.
Secondly, the study has drawn on an international team of experts and focuses on
common international standards and solutions, as befits the trans-jurisdictional
and transnational nature of the problems to be addressed. Specifically, the
project involves not only US personnel and institutions but also EU, Indian, and
Australasian expertise.
viii
Contributors
John Kleinig is Professor of Philosophy in the Department of Criminal Justice
at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, and teaches in the PhD Programs in
Philosophy and Criminal Justice at the Graduate Center, City University of New
York. He is also Professorial Fellow in Criminal Justice Ethics at the Centre for
Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics, Charles Sturt University, Canberra.
Peter Mameli is Associate Professor in the Department of Public Management
at John College of Criminal Justice and is part of the PhD Program in Criminal
Justice at the Graduate Center, CUNY.
Seumas Miller is Foundation Director for the Centre for Applied Philosophy
and Public Ethics (an Australian Research Council Special Research Centre) at
the Australian National University and Charles Sturt University, and a senior
research fellow in the Centre for Ethics and Technology at Delft University of
Technology, Netherlands.
Douglas Salane is Associate Professor in the Department of Mathematics and
Computer Science and in the graduate program in Forensic Computing at John
Jay College of Criminal Justice. He is also Director of the Center for Cybercrime
Studies.
Adina Schwartz is Professor of Law in the Department of Law, Police Science,
and Criminal Justice Administration at John Jay College of Criminal Justice and
the Masters Program in Forensic Computing at John Jay College of Criminal
Justice. She is also the Assistant Director of the Center for Cybercrime Studies.
ix