The world is going through an emergency due to the outbreak of COVID-19.
Technology has intervened a lot during this effort to save lives, including by spreading public health messages and increasing access to health care.
Stating “the alarming levels of spread and severity,” the WHO called for governments into taking serious actions to stop the spreading of the virus.
In the last couple of months, or “freedom” has been compromised for the sake of our benefit.
However, if we observe a little more, with technology to track people for Covid19 positive cases, it has led to serious issues with privacy altering their definitions and boundaries forever.
A New-Delhi based activist said, “ “The world has never seen this kind of a situation before. From a civil rights perspective, the challenge is of balancing the health of many versus the privacy of a few.”
We have already discussed how Google has been tracking millions of data in a report stating its efforts to eradicate the virus. But that is not the only issue.
Is the surveillance to fight the pandemic legal?
For a government to fight the virus, it is important to restrict some human rights responding to the medical emergency of the situation. But for the increased surveillance a proper criterion needs to be maintained.
The practice of tracking and surveillance must be less intrusive and deliver more desired results.
Any measures taken to protect the population that limits people’s rights and freedoms must be lawful, necessary, and proportionate.
For surveillance to work properly, the Siracusa Principles states that:
- the least intrusive and restrictive available to reach the objective;
- directed toward a legitimate objective of general interest;
- based on scientific evidence and neither arbitrary nor discriminatory in application
- strictly necessary in a democratic society to achieve the objective;
- provided for and carried out in accordance with the law; and
- of limited duration, respectful of human dignity, and subject to review.
The protection of human rights
The international human rights law governments have a responsibility towards its netizens to provide the right to freedom of expression, including the right to receive, seek and impart information.
Now public health restrictions towards greater good may not jeopardize the right itself.
Despite this, a number of countries have failed numerous times to uphold the right by taking actions against health workers or journalists.
For instance, China government withheld various information on the virus, including the severity, underreported cases of infection dismissing the likelihood of transmission between humans.
Authorities even detained people for reporting on the epidemic on social media.
It has been reported that, In early January, Li Wenliang, a doctor at a hospital in Wuhan where infected patients were being treated, was summoned by police for “spreading rumors” after he warned of the new virus in an online chatroom. He died in early February from the virus.
Again in Thailand, journalists and health workers faced lawsuits after they criticized government responses to the outbreak, raised concerns about a possible cover-up.
However, the majority of the countries kept open communication with the world reporting all the updates regularly.
For instance, the Singapore government, regularly polished articles with detailed statistics on the number and rate of infections and recoveries.
In Italy, the government-held regular conferences to share data and implemented an aggressive public campaign about better practices to protect oneself and others from spreading the virus.
The Role of AI and Big Data in public surveillance
The role of AI technology has been really beneficial for surveillance purposes.
In Poland, the government developed an app to ensure people’s compliance with the quarantine.
The app reportedly sends prompts for selfies to be uploaded that are then verified using face recognition data.
Even in India, a similar app is being rolled out which seeks geo-tagged selfies.
However, this could also increase discrimination for marginalized communities in a country, especially like India.
Governments should not use surveillance technologies that gather forms of data beyond what is legitimately needed to contain the disease.
The use of personal location data is also a concern now
Countries like Austria, Belgium Italy, UK all of them are allegedly using anonymized information from telecom companies.
Other countries are using cell phone data but without the added protections of anonymization or aggregation.
In South Korea, authorities are going far as sending health advisory texts, accompanied by personal details of infected patients, including hyperlinks which open to detailed data about their movements.
This technique is a major breach of privacy fuelling stigma against the virus.
Measures like these raise concerns about safety and privacy issues for the citizens. Once the situation is in control, these data may be sold for other purposes that may not have a positive intention.
Ultimately, there is no denying that the vast use of technology for gathering personal information can cause a concern definitely posing a threat to our civil rights. It is the duty of the government to use only the required minimum information so that it doesn’t pull f another USA PATRIOT Act after 9/11, causing mental and physical harm to innocent people.
Protecting public health is the requirement of the hour but damage to our constitutional rights cannot be healed in decades.
What do you think about the situation? Let us know at Skyram Technologies. Visit us here.
And for more information read here!
Till then be safe, stay indoors.
