| Summary: | Informatisation was introduced as a functional parameter in social and political research by French Scholars Simon Nora and Alain Minc. Today, almost a quarter of a century later, popular and academic political debates in the West appear to be growing increasingly aware of the intense interaction between information technology and social development. This project follows in the footsteps of this increasing awareness and explores the meaning of digitisation for the legal and political concept of citizen’s privacy. The project seeks to contribute to a wider body of literature that wishes to provide meaningful answers to the following questions: (1) what socio-technical trends are evident today in the information privacy policies of the UK and the US? (2) What particular political version do these trends seem to favour and what do these visions appear to suggest for the future of citizens’ privacy in the West? (3) What is the potential importance of digital networking for practices of social management and control, both by governmental decision centres and commercial bodies? As case study for the above issues, the eventful appearance of two recent legislative works has been selected: the <i>Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act </i>(RIPA), enacted by the UK parliament in July 2000; and the <i>Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act </i>(CALEA), enacted in the US in 1994. Both Acts, which have yet to be fully implemented in practice, in effect make it mandatory for all telecommunications operators and service providers to, among other requirements, ensure that their customers’ communications can be intercepted by law enforcement and intelligence organisations, whose interception capabilities have been seriously hampered by the digitisation of telecommunications during the past few years. The project combines quantitative and qualitative data on RIPA and CALEA, which have been acquired through open-source, restricted or leaked government and industry reports on the subject, as well as through a number of interviews with informed individuals representing different sides of the communication interception debate. The development of communications interception is thus placed in the context of complex relationships between specific political actors, such as national policy experts and governmental advisors, law enforcement and corporate decision-makers and members of regulatory bodies.
|
|---|
