There are various opinions about what if there was no CATV surveillance, and everyone could have their own personal space where they can live without any thoughts of being watched by someone, and what are the results by installing Acts, in other words has installing CATV cameras helped improving the goal of what is it supposed to do? But mostly all of the people agree to that it poses a threat to personal privacy which is of value to the individuals and to the society.
In regards to this, Moor (1997) has introduced a theory of privacy that incorporates important elements of non- intrusion, non-interference and informational views of privacy. An individual has privacy in a situation if in that particular situation the individual is protected from intrusion, interference, and information access by others’ (Moor, 1997; Duncan Langford, pop, 2000). The government’s evidence does not totally explain that how the collection of the surveillance has helped them to improve their objectives.
The use of surveillance and personal information may lead to a disagreement between the interests of the citizens and the gathering of personal information, which has the potential to destabilize privacy and the freedom of an individual. It is not the technology that invades personal privacy of the people but it is the people who have tendency in various ways to invade privacy of others (Stateless p. 25 2007).
Although CATV cameras are related to privacy violation, it must be mentioned that the problem of privacy is not a new issue. Theories on Privacy There are many theories related to personal privacy which have been published in last few years and few of them are Seclusion theory of privacy by Westerns (1 967), who describes that privacy is ‘the voluntary and temporary withdrawal of a person from the general society through physical and psychological means’ (Weston, 1967; Amaryllis, p. 10 201 1).
The second theory is based on communication privacy management, which explores ‘the relationship between privacy and confidentiality to better understand the reasons why people are increasingly finding it difficult to have faith in the notion Of confidentiality’ (Petition, 2002; Fife, T. A and Fife, W. A. IPPP, 2009). The third theory of privacy is the control theory of privacy, wherein ‘one has privacy if and only if one has control over information about oneself’ (Fried, 1970; Earache’s, 1975; Duncan Langford, POP, 2000).
The fourth privacy which is used and referred the most in today’s time is given by Moor (1997), and is based on natural and normative privacy situation which enables us to differentiate between the condition of privacy and the right to privacy, and also between the loss of privacy and the violation of privacy (Moor, 1997; Duncan Langford, pop, 2000).
Importance of CATV surveillance in the society The aim of using CATV surveillance ‘is to act pre-emotively upon potentially problematic zones, to structure them in such a way as to reduce the likelihood of undesirable events or conduct occurring, and increase the childhood of those type of events and activities that are desired’ (Rose p. 237 1999).
Also, what the government has to say about CATV surveillance is ‘There is a need to gather and access personal information to: support the delivery of personalized and better public services; fight crime and protect public services; reduce the burden on business and the citizen, and tackle social exclusion through early invention. This processing of personal information is demanded in greater quantity and in quicker time than ever before’ – via the web, House of Lords (2013).
Similarly the main aims of using CATV irreverence is to prevent crime, aid the identification, collection of evidence and prosecution of others, assistance in maintaining public order and reducing publics fear of crime, assisting the police in providing swift response to criminal and anti-social activity, assisting the emergency services and reduce graffiti, vandalism and criminal damage. It is also used in assisting the aspects of traffic management and to assist in event of civil emergency disaster – see, for instance Lambent Council (2013).
Social Issues: Just like a coin everything has two sides, positive aspects and negative aspects. CATV surveillance has helped solving many crimes but also raged some communities in the LIKE for using large surveillance. According to a recent report by Metropolitan news of London, due to OCW surveillance has helped them to solve ‘six crimes a day in London’ – via the web, BBC (2010). Another incident wherein CATV images were helpful was in Sydney July, 2013. A young drunk teenager was tastier by the police and six kinds of different charges were alleged against him for breaking the laws.
After reviewing the CATV images in court by the operators and the judge all his six harass were dropped -? via the web, BBC. Net (2013). But installing CATV cameras has not helped all the communities every. Where. In 201 0, police force put large part of Birmingham where Muslim communities live under the surveillance of CATV for preventing crime but in recent report given by Sara Thornton, Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police it concluded that ‘The lack of transparency about the purpose Of project has resulted in significantly community anger and loss of trust – via the web, Daily Mail (2010).
Similarly, a British civil liberties and privacy pressure group founded in 2009 ‘Big Brother Watch’ also publishes reports and campaigns for the general public about the social ethical issues involved in using CATV surveillance – via the web, Big Brother Watch (2013). Ethical and Professional Issues: In most of the cases the use of surveillance by an ethical authority is closely linked to the justifying cause of the surveillance. But sometimes there’s also misuse of CATV surveillance.
For example, in 2005 two council CATV operators in Enfield, Liverpool spied on a naked woman as she undressed for a bath and as she was going to the toilet. The two men were charged with the harass of voyeurism in the court -? via the web, BBC (2005). A similar case of misusing CATV images was in Brighton, wherein a leading car company confirmed that a member of staff was suspended because couples having sex in cars in national car parks was been turned into a DVD -? via the web, BBC (2005).
These types of misusing the CATV cameras led to anger and disappointment in the communities around the ELK, because according to the legislation of Protection of Freedom Acts 201 2 the CATV operators did not follow the code of practice which is published by the ICC (Information Commissioner Office). The code of practice clearly says that the effect of using CATV’ on individuals and their privacy should always be taken into account; the operators must have clear responsibilities and accountability for all surveillance activities.
The operators must follow clear rules, policies and procedures in place and there should be no storage of information unless of those which are required. The operators must use it in the most effective way to support public safety and law enforcement – via the web, Home Office (2013). Therefore, we can say that it is ethical if an individual is carrying out irreverence of his property to secure the property from theft, but not if it is used to spy on the neighbors or other tenants.
Similarly for parents it is ethical to use the surveillance technology to monitor the activity of their infant children, but the use Of surveillance in monitoring also the babysitter is far more controversial and unethical. Recently through a measure taken by the government to reduce and solve crime efficiently, Neighborhood Watch Schemes was introduced in the UK so it is ethical that the street is watched by a group of people if it has been subject to a recent burglary, but it is unethical o intimidate an unpopular neighbor through constant surveillance and this can be totally considered as an invasion of their personal privacy.
Legal Issues: Any government body or organization that carries out CATV surveillance has to follow the 12 codes or practice which is published by the Information Commissioner Office under the act or Protection of Freedom Act 2012, Data Protection Act 1998 and Human Rights Act 1998 -? via the web, Home Office (2013). The councils and other government bodies conduct the ACT V camera surveillance under the acts Of Crime and Disorder Act 1998, Criminal Justice ND Public Disorder Act 1994, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and Criminal Procedures and Investigations Act 1996.
A recent report published by Big Brother Watch shows that RIP (Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000) surveillance was misused in 2008 on a family in Poole forlornly suspecting the family lying about their address in order to get the daughter into a particular school. Another case of RIP surveillance was used by Crony Council, in which it was used to monitor a man who had trimmed a hedge and the operators stalked the area to find out who had done it.
Because of the misuse of RIP surveillance, a further recommendation was done in the RIP act 2000 that no councils should have these powers unless authorized by the Magistrates’ Court with a warrant and only the police has the power to investigate these types of matters – via the web, Big Brother Watch (2013). Conclusion: To sum up, throughout the essay we have seen the arguments between how CATV has helped the government bodies and other organizations to solve crimes and how it is being misused by some authorities.
