A Decade in Pixels: Analyzing Incidents of State-Sponsored Surveillance From the Last Decade

Introduction

State Surveillance is the act of employing technology like sensors (thermal imaging systems, computer vision chips, surveillance-enabled light bulbs etc.), data analytic software (predictive policy systems, social media analytics etc.) (Sharma, 2021) with the objective of collecting, monitoring, storing and retaining sensitive data with or without the consent of the targeted individual (Sharma, 2021). This can be done either by Government servants or organizations acting under the direction of the Government. State Surveillance also includes using internet surveillance like- decryption tools, spyware to name a few. Another common method of gaining intelligence/ information is using audio/video recording devices which can be body worn, drone based. (Sharma, 2021).

We are living in the age of surveillance. The digital technologies that have revolutionized our lives has also created a detailed shadow of our lives on record, available as data. The Governments across the world have shown great promise to acquire such personal data sometimes in the name of security and national interest and some other reasons which are too ambiguous (Richards, 2013). While autocratic regimes have long been the antagonist when talking about surveillance, today even democratic countries do not shy away from indiscriminate surveillance of their citizens (Richards, 2013).

This Chapter intends to inform the reader of the magnitude of the problem with increased capabilities and potential avenues for state surveillance in light of the advent of newer and more sophisticated technologies. It will also broadly explore the methods and technological tools employed for state surveillance at present. Specifically, the Chapter will lay emphasis on the significant increase in the capabilities and frequency of surveillance purportedly, in the interest of national security and counter-terrorism efforts. The Chapter will also attempt to build a narrative around the key contemporary events like the Edward Snowden NSA Leak, Cambridge Analytica and the mass surveillance in China such events have influenced the conversation around state surveillance across the globe.

The English noun surveillance comes from the French verb sur-veillir, which is related to the Latin term vigilare (Marx, 2015). Vigilare loosely translates to something threatening lurking beyond the watchtower and town walls but the vigilant can successfully ward off the threat (Marx, 2015). A breakdown of these terms justifies the first thought that people have about surveillance i.e association of surveillance with policing activities and security agencies. Surveillance today has exceeded the bounds and limitations of “traditional surveillance” techniques.

Professor David Lyon has effectively captured the essence of surveillance. He mentions that surveillance is primarily about power but it also imbibes personhood. Lyon defines surveillance as “the focused, systematic and routine attention to personal details for purposes of influence, management, protection or direction” (Lyon 2007). Lyon’s definition highlights four noteworthy characteristics of surveillance. Focused relates to the focus / aim on learning more about individuals, systematic highlights that surveillance is intentional and not random. Thirdly, routine highlights that it is an ordinary administrative apparatus and finally, variety of purposes – surveillance can be used for a wide range of purposes like totalitarian domination, crushing dissent or protecting civil liberties of individuals to name a few.