Introduction
Just before the year 2001, the USA faced a lot of insecurity including the infamous terrorist attack of September 11, 2001: this was a turning point for the government of the United States of America (Friedman, 2009). It was immediately after this terrorist attack that the federal government decided to develop security measures to curb any further attacks of the same nature in the future. Among the measures taken by the government was a proposal to make changes to then available statutory law; that is how Patriot Act, 2001 come into place.
The Patriot Act, 2001 was unanimously passed by the congress sitting during the time of 43rd President George Bush. The Act made changes to some of the most important departments that have the mandate of internal security. In fact, as it is the Act allows federal officials to arbitrary track and intercept any person suspected of terrorism activities as part of the law enforcement. Because of its nature, the Patriot Act has elicited a lot of debates from both its critics and proponents and has been strongly criticized for interfering with people’s privacy (Scheppler, 2006). This paper focus is on evaluating the advantages and disadvantages of authorizing the USA Patriot Act of 2001 and its implications to people’s privacy rights in the US.
Advantages of the Patriot Act 2001
A major advantage of the enactment of the Patriot Act is that it has ensured and guaranteed security to all people in the US. Through the act, the government has kept its promise to protect each American citizen against any form of terrorism and terrorist attacks in the country both from within and outside.
In fact, ways of identifying terrorists have been put in place to ensure that no terrorist-related activities can be implemented without being detected on time. This is because the Act has amended laws that allow security officers to undertake preemptive measures by arresting any person who is suspected to be a terrorist for further investigations before they can effectively undertake such acts (Scheppler, 2006).
Apart from strengthening laws on security, the Act promotes and facilitates communication between various government organs of security to curb and prevent terrorism. This is through the powers enacted and given to the various departments by the Patriot Act such as random checks of files and other records of suspected individuals to detect any criminals and terrorist-related activities well on time especially among foreigners visiting the country (Friedman, 2009).
Through the Act, better, advanced, and developed procedures have been put in place to promote security such as regular training of personnel on security issues and use of hi-tech pieces of equipment with modern technology that increases the ability to detect and fight terrorism. Some notable examples include the use of wiretapping, computers, and advanced ways of acquiring surveillance information from both citizens and non-citizen in the country. This has enabled the security agencies and other departments to communicate and act with an emergency in case of terrorist threats. This Act has therefore enabled security agencies to mount a rapid response and manage terrorist incidences if and when they occur (Scheppler, 2006).
Another advantage according to Friedman is that the act having been put in place immediately after the September 2001 terrorist attack, ensured that individuals affected were compensated without.
It also facilitated the reconstruction of the country after the attack by financing the rebuilding of the destroyed building and infrastructures. Finally, the Act has promoted an enhanced and improved domestic system of dealing with issues like protection of national borders, secure witness protection programs, and improvement of intelligence structures.
Disadvantages of the Patriot Act 2001
The enactment of the Patriot Act, 2001 has on the other hand raised several criticisms from its opponents because of its approach to security issues which have been described as violating human rights and people’s privacy. This is the reason that human rights activists have consistently opposed the enactment of this law on the ground that it has accorded the security organs with excessive powers to abuse human rights (Scheppler, 2006).
Another reason cited by its critics includes the fact that the Act empowers the federal government to scrutinize suspects intensively even without evidence which opens the door for abuse of these powers. The use of wiretaps for instance also means that follow-up can be done which involves scrutinizing a person’s private communications which is a direct invasion of a person’s private life (Friedman, 2009).
Besides this, there are many prejudices and discrimination undertones in the way that the Act has been structured; particularly as it pertains to Muslims and Arab-American leaders since it is clear it discriminates against them on some aspects (Friedman, 2009). It would appear that this category of persons is deliberately discriminated upon and tagged as probable terrorist suspects and thus more likely to be investigated and arrested than the rest of the population (Friedman, 2009).
In fact, the Act specifically promotes the investigation and surveillance of persons from such countries as Iran and Iraq.
Implications of the Act on citizens’ privacy rights in the US
The Patriotic Act, 2001 main objective is to preempt and respond to terrorist acts within the US by use of all means under its disposal in every feasible way, unfortunately, this also includes trumping of human rights and violation of personal privacy. There is no doubt that the enactment of this law has promoted impunity as far as human rights and the right to privacy issues are concerned. This is because it has excessively strengthened all security organs which has directly led to abuse of people’s privacy at every level.
Indeed, security agencies currently have the power to collect evidence and undertake surveillance by use of various methods which include wiretaps, email hacking, and obtaining banks records among others (Scheppler, 2006). Again, the Act has given the power to officers to investigate and collect information from schools and libraries regarding any suspected person which directly impacts a person’s freedom (Scheppler, 2006).
In addition, the Act has also empowered security agencies to investigate financial records of any citizen even those not residing within the US suspected to be connected to terrorist activities, and freeze such accounts if need be. Furthermore, the Act empowers officers to arrest and deport any suspected terrorists back to their country of origin without necessarily having to confirm such charges. Most importantly it has become the law for Companies to submit all information of all their workers that involve everything (Scheppler, 2006).
Finally, the Act has the power to interfere with private businesses which it can shut down when they are suspected of serving as conduits of laundered money that finance terrorist-related activities (Friedman, 2009).
Conclusion
Generally, the Act has both positive and negative implications on people’s lives in the US; on one hand, it has strengthened security and drastically reduced the chances of damaging terrorist activities to take place while on the other hand trampling on human rights and privacy issues. Although the Act was mainly enacted to fight terrorism, it has greatly interfered with human rights and privacy issues of people in the US but which I must say has been necessary to achieve the intended objective.
References
Scheppler, B. (2006). The USA Patriot Act antiterrorist legislation in response to 9/11. New York: The Rosen Publishing group. Inc.
Friedman, L.S. (2009). The Patriot Act. Web.