| The tragic and
sad events of September 11, 2001 indeed shocked
the United States of America. These events also
opened the eyes of the entire western world, making
them realize that terrorists could strike from
anywhere, including air, sea, or through land
routes. This was duly evidenced in the aerial
attacks on the ‘World Trade Center’
and the ‘Pentagon Complex’ in Washington
D. C. In response, the United States Administrations
hastily passed the U.S.A. Patriot Act of 2002,
stated to be the largest expansion of government
search and surveillance powers in the entire US
history. The fact that the passage of the Patriot
Act passed through the U. S. Congress with little
resistance was due to belief that the Americans
needed protection, perhaps rightly so. However,
after the passage of some two years since the
Patriot Act was signed into a law, there is growing
dissent about the implications of the Act with
respect to civil liberties of American citizens
and foreign nationals at one end, while the US
government is adamant to pursue its war against
terrorism using this Act as a shield.
The Infringement of, And Nature of Expendable
Civil Liberties
A brief on the Patriot Act reveals that this act
has given federal government and local investigators
unprecedented powers over American citizens including
the right to carry out secret search and surveillance
activities, and coordination and sharing of personal
information between law-enforcement agencies.
For example Section 215 of the Patriot Act notes
that the law enforcement agencies can interfere
and demand personal records including but not
limited to the religious association of individual,
medical records, tapping phone calls to as small
activities as renting a video or lending books
from a library.
Another Section 218 clearly stipulates and authorizes
government agencies the right to secret searches
and seizures under the justification that the
individual has "foreign" ties.
Section 213, on the other hand allows government
law enforcement agencies to carry out secret searches,
wiretap or video any criminal investigation, even
if it is not a terrorist investigation.
Then there is the Section 215 of the Patriot
Act which allows the government law enforcement
agencies to withhold any set of information, and
deny the respective individual any right to know
whether any personal records were disclosed or
not.
Th strange aspect of all these infringements
is that all the said activities can be carried
out by federal or local law enforcement agencies
without the knowledge of the individual. Hence,
a clear infringement of civil liberties of American
citizens who cannot even question any of the said
activities, even under the rights allowed in the
Freedom of Information Act. (Lindroff, 2003)
The Measures Taken by the US Government To Prevent
Terrorism
One may note that the US government's immediate
response to the terrorist acts of September 11
was the framing and implementation of the Patriot
Act. As also mentioned in the above sections,
this Act has invited more criticism than praise
for it has severely infringed upon some of the
basic and fundamental rights of American citizens
as well as foreign nationals. Yet, there is more
than compelling evidence that this is not the
first time that the rights of American citizens
have been taken away in the guise of national
security. Abraham Lincoln's suspension of basic
rights, and the promulgation of the Espionage
Act during the Civil War are excellent examples
to this respect (CNN, 2001).
However, if one were to think in the perspective
of national security, or for that matter global
security, it would not at all be strange for a
democratic society to give up some of their alien
rights, or civil liberties as most of us have
come to term it. It is precisely this belief that
has been pursued by the US government. This also
provides comprehensive answers to all those critics
who instill belated notions on the number of rights
taken away, without even giving a slight consideration
for the larger interests at stake for her citizens
in particular, and the entire world in general.
This line of thinking can duly be confirmed from
the writings of a political philosopher John Locke,
who noted that men are totally free only in a
"natural state". Locke continues to
note that total freedom in a natural state, or
one without any set of laws or rules in fact leads
to "inconveniences". A clear understanding
of these inconveniences reveals that in the absence
of any law, any set of rules, and the absence
of a government, stronger and more powerful individuals
would only limit the freedom of the people. These
powerful individuals would have all the power
and strength to exploit people or populations
for their own benefit. As a result, there would
only be anarchy and lawlessness, aside from the
fact that only the strongest would survive. In
turn, it is clear that limitation to rights would
eventually lead to limitations to lives of individuals.
The right to life is indeed the ultimate right
superceding all other rights otherwise claimed
to have been taken away in the present circumstances
from the promulgation of the Patriot Act by the
sitting US government. (To what extent is it acceptable
to limit a citizens civil liberties during wartime?’,
2004).
From the above, it is more than clear as to why
the Patriot Act has been promulgated in the first
place, and as part of the same Act, why citizens
of our own nation as well as foreigners are deprived
of their basic civil rights. It also brings to
light that this Act and the deprivation of the
civil rights are intended to create a society
of civilized citizens, hence a civil society,
instead of a society that would bring in people
with ulterior intentions for exploiting their
own populations. |