Liz,

This is a timely discussion coming at a time when the fight against terrorism is a global issue requiring concerted efforts from all.

I will attempt to answer the first question. While citizens expect the government to guarantee their other rights (including privacy), they are also guaranteed other rights. It is therefore a question of balancing security and other rights.

There have been many discussions on how to achieve this balance. Most agree that there are circumstances when there can be lawful interception of communication or access to communication data because privacy is not an absolute right. However, interception and access must be within a framework.

IHRB vouches for a human rights approach to lawful interception and access by government and suggests the following guidelines:

1. Prerequisites to Communications Surveillance (surveillance as a last measure, surveillance laws, targeted surveillance, human rights safeguards)
2. Authorisation Processes (judicial/independent (sometimes executive) authority before surveillance)
3. Oversight (by an independent body)
4. Notification of Individuals under surveillance
5. Remedy (linked to notification as one needs to know they have been under surveillance)
6. Transparency (educating public on surveillance and remedies, publishing reports on surveillance)
7. Provision for Framework Review (to review the laws and regulations on surveillance to monitor human rights compliance, efficacy etc)

I look forward to Kenya's privacy law so that we can interrogate how far it achieves this balance.

Regards,

On 6 April 2016 at 09:34, Liz Orembo via kictanet <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:

Dear listers,

Today we begin our online discussions on digital privacy.

By electing a government, we give it a responsibility to protect our security and in the course of that, they make policies by which our data is collected and used.

Nanjira had shared a CIGI-IPSOS research (here) on digital security and trust done early this year which found out that:
75% of Kenyans law enforcement agencies should have a right to access the content of their citizens’ online communications for valid national security reasons
66% agreed that tech companies should not build technologies that prevent the law enforcement agencies from accessing the content of their communication.

Are ‘National security’ and ‘terrorism’ being used as a means to justify government breaches of security?
Is data collection proportionate and justified? And how secure are our government's’ information systems from other parties
How can the tech industry work with the government on security while ensuring people's right to privacy are not infringed?
What are your concerns on government collection of data and surveillance?

Karibuni.
--

Best regards.

Liz.

PGP ID: 0x1F3488BF

_______________________________________________
kictanet mailing list
kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke
https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet

Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/nmutungu%40gmail.com

The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.

KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.

Grace L.N. Mutung'u
Nairobi Kenya
Skype: gracebomu
Twitter: @Bomu

<http://www.diplointernetgovernance.org/profile/GraceMutungu>

PGP ID : 0x33A3450F