Roles of the Legislative, Executive and Judicial Branches with Regard to Digital Privacy

Through widespread digital surveillance, many governments and commercial organizations are breaching a fundamental human right. The right to privacy is now unattainable due to the development of digital technology. The right to privacy is guaranteed to consumers of digital media. To deal with the revelation of personal information in the digital era, it is necessary to build stronger privacy safeguards. Digital media raises a number of issues for users. The first problem is the unlawful use of personal data gleaned from individuals' internet activities. The unauthorized disclosure of personal data to third parties is the second problem (Weber & Staiger, 2017). The three arms of the government have the sole responsibility of making and implementing laws touching on digital privacy. The three branches include the judiciary, legislature, and the executive and (Bumke, 2016). The branches are independent of one another and play a crucial role of executing different roles pertaining to ensuring privacy and confidentially of personal information in the digital era.

The role of the legislature is to develop legislations touching on the privacy of personal information in the digital environment. The legislative assemblies of several nations across the globe have established the ‘internet bills of rights with the aim of curtailing the violation of privacy in the digital media. Internet rights are considered to be pragmatic in upholding the rights to digital privacy. The judiciary interprets and applies laws pertaining to digital privacy. It also handles cases on infringement of digital privacy and makes decisions based on the established laws and rules. The executive is responsible for enforcing the digital privacy laws that have been enacted by the legislature. It integrates privacy and security measures required in the digital era (Bumke, 2016).

The internet is often misconstrued to be more hospitable than it is. The cyberspace is nasty and full of unscrupulous characters just like the real world. Individuals often forget to consider the amount and the type of information that is placed online through nonchalant means. Data has emerged as the key currency of government. Government agencies are increasingly engaging vast amount of collection, storage, and manipulation of a vast amount of data. The emergence of the internet of things (IoT) has played a crucial role in increasing the amount of data being collected and shared (Bazzell & Carroll, 2016). As a result, many issues have emerged on how the government manages data through the enactment of public policies.

Despite the fact that new technologies provide a powerful tool for the development sector to work more effectively, it also introduces risks. Digital gadgets like mobile phones and the internet provide new opportunities for planning and coordinating activities, exposing hidden truths, as well as mobilizing and engaging a new audience. The breach of personal privacy is considered to be one of the main risks associated with the use of digital technology. Accessing information can assist individuals to hold governments and development agencies accountable. ICT is used in collecting, monitoring, and assessing information on needs, impacts, activities, and spending. The adoption of technologies support accountability and allow individuals to take part in their governance through civic participation and freedom of expression. As digital technologies become cheaper and easier to use, there are many invincible problems associated with its use. The control of sensitive information on the internet has emerged to be contentious issues. Research studies reveal that what people do online often track invisible agents. Many websites are known to install hundreds of tracking files on the hardware of its visitors/user. Most of these files are often shared across various institutions without the permissions of the website users. The security and privacy of digital technologies have serious implications. The three arms of the government should put in necessary measures to prevent the violation of personal privacy.

The legislature is responsible for setting the laws for governing digital privacy. In India, the executive branch of the government employs the 2005 Right to Information Act with the aim of exposing corruption, mining scams, and mismanagement of resources in government departments. Unfortunately, most citizens who lodged the right to information applications are often harassed by the government. There are many techniques that can be used for protecting sensitive information. Digital security can be enabled by simple techniques such as the use of https instead of http, hard-to-break passwords, and encryption software.

The expectations of citizens have radically changed due to the fast-moving and evolving trends in digital technologies. The approach by which people approach, interact, and relate with governmental organizations and services have also changed. The interaction shave evolved to be horizontal, empowering and spontaneous. It is the complete opposite of the rule=based, traditional hierarchical, and bureaucratic systems of governance that were developed over decades ago. Data is considered to be central to these interactions. The need for data has emerged to be a central theme since it applies to all aspects of the rapidly evolving digital society. The rapid revolution of technology has contributed to the emergence of business models, and unprecedented level of global connectivity. The developments of have contributed to large volumes of data (Katsikas, Lambrinoudakis & Furnell, 2016). Government agencies have to heavily invest in cybersecurity measures with the aim of handling the increasing risks of digital privacy. Although legislative arms of various governments have enacted digital privacy acts, the executive wings often find it difficult to implement these policies. As a result, the judiciary is often forced to salvage the situation by handling numerous cases of privacy breaches in the cyberspace.

Effective management of big data has become a reality due to the developments of hardware and software. Majority of the large is owned by the private sector. Organizations like Facebook and Google monetized data and made it their central business model. Although data has become a source of wealth and value creation, big questions that are yet to be answered have emerged. The ownership of the data remains to be a highly contentious issue. The establishment of the basic data charter is considered crucial in enabling citizens to understand their rights and responsibilities. The management and ensuring privacy remains to be a big problem (Holt & Malčić, 2015). Although the digital space largely remains unregulated, government agencies should scale up their efforts of vetting, maintaining and protecting data. Societies look upon their governments to play the role of ensuring privacy and confidentiality of personal information in the cyberspace.

Research findings indicate that people's confidence continues to be battered by privacy problems and security breaches. Despite the increasing concerns about data privacy, governments are not doing enough to ensure data protection. Strong regulations that govern how data brokers repurpose personal information should be established. The current privacy laws are considered inadequate in protecting the privacy of internet users. Theft of personal information such as social security number and credit card has become a common occurrence. Although the proposal for the protection and regulation of national data has been in the United States for years, it has not gotten much traction in Congress since there is lack of agreement on requirements, thresholds, and standards (Holt & Malčić, 2015). Governments find it difficult to dictate how companies should protect consumer data since law and regulations tend to move much slower as compared to business practice and technology.



References

Bazzell, M., & Carroll, J. (2016). The Complete Privacy & Security Desk Reference-Volume I Digital.

Bumke, C. (2016). The Obligation of Consistency in Lawmaking. Rational Lawmaking Under Review, 155-188. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33217-8_7

Holt, J., & Malčić, S. (2015). The Privacy Ecosystem: Regulating Digital Identity in the United States and European Union. Journal of Information Policy, 5, 155-178.

Katsikas, S., Lambrinoudakis, C., & Furnell, S. (Eds.). (2016). Trust, Privacy and Security in Digital Business: 13th International Conference, TrustBus 2016, Porto, Portugal, September 7-8, 2016, Proceedings (Vol. 9830). Springer.

Weber, R. H., & Staiger, D. (2017). Digital privacy in a media orientated world. International Journal of Public Law and Policy, 6(1), 21-38.