Kathmandu School of Law Review

P-ISSN : 2091-2110, E-ISSN : 2773-8159, DOI : 10.46985, Publisher : Kathmandu School of Law, Nepal
Annual flagship journal of Kathmandu School of Law, Nepal

Volume 8, Issue 2, November 2020
Articles

COVID-19 Contact Tracing Apps and Technologies as a tool of Mass Surveillance: A Cure Deadlier than the Disease

PDF
  • Arafat Ibnul Bashar
Arafat Ibnul Bashar
LL.M. in the Department of Law, University of Chittagong
DOI: https://doi.org/10.46985/kslr.v8i2.2152

Published 2021-07-27

How to Cite

Bashar, A. I. . (2021). COVID-19 Contact Tracing Apps and Technologies as a tool of Mass Surveillance: A Cure Deadlier than the Disease. Kathmandu School of Law Review, 8(2), 50–67. https://doi.org/10.46985/kslr.v8i2.2152
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Abstract

“Desperate times call for desperate measures” – COVID-19 contact tracing apps and technology have been operating in the desperate times created by the COVID-19 global pandemic. But the impact of these apps and technology on society is contentious, as the benefit gained from such is said to be largely outweighed by the negative impact it can have during and after the pandemic. Surveillance measures have always been a tricky business. Labeled as the ‘magical solution’ for most horrid problems of our time such as terrorism, crime prevention, it has always failed to live up to its name and has proved to be one of the prominent tools for the authoritarian regimes to oppress people and commit gross human rights violations. Over-reliance on COVID-19 apps and considering them a ‘magical solution’ to containing the spread of Coronavirus can have irreversible consequences. Instead, the pandemic and desperate situation posed by it may have provided the regimes around the world an opportunity to introduce new surveillance infrastructures or strengthen the existing ones, which would have taken years and lots of friction from courts, activists, and civil society, to achieve. The article assesses the legality of COVID-19 contact tracing apps and technology and tries to draw a picture of the society that faces the consequences of surveillance and data collected through such apps and technology and looks at how legal mechanisms can cope with such consequences.

PDF

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. ‘The Right to Privacy in the Digital Age’, 30 June 2014, U.N. Doc. A/HRC/27/37; GAOR.
  2. Michel Foucault, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, Pantheon Books, New York, 1977, p. 172.
  3. Genevieve Bell, ‘We need mass surveillance to fight COVID-19—but it doesn’t have to be creepy’, MIT Technology Review, 2020, available at https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/04/12/999186/COVID19-contact-tracing-surveillance-data-privacy-anonymity/, accessed on 10 July 2020.
  4. F. Douglas Scutchfield & C. William Keck, Principles of Public Health Practice, Delmar Learning, New York, 3rd edition, 2003, p. 71.
  5. ‘Digital tools for COVID-19 contact tracing’, World Health Organization, 2 June 2020, , p. 1. available at https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-2019-nCoV-Contact_Tracing-Tools_Annex-2020.1, accesed on 18 April 2021.
  6. Ibid.
  7. Yasheng Huang, Meicen Sun &Yuze Sui, ‘How Digital Contact Tracing Slowed COVID-19 in East Asia’, Harvard Business Review, 2020, available at https://hbr.org/2020/04/how-digital-contact-tracing-slowedCOVID-19-in-east-asia, accessed on 31 July 2020.
  8. ‘Report of the WHO-China Joint Mission on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)’, World Health Organization, 2020, available at https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/who-china-jointmissionon-COVID-19-final-report.pdf, accessed on 10 July 2020.
  9. ‘Controlling coronavirus using a mobile app to trace close proximity contacts’, Oxford University, 2 April 2020, available at https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2020-04-02-controlling-coronavirus-using-mobile-apptraceclose-proximity-contacts, accessed on 4 August 2020.
  10. Dave Gershgorn, ‘We Mapped How the Coronavirus Is Driving New Surveillance Programs Around the World’, OneZero, 9 April 2020, available at https://onezero.medium.com/the-pandemic-is-a-trojan-horseforsurveillance-programs-around-the-world-887fa6f12ec9, accessed on 11 July 2020.
  11. Justin Fendos, ‘How surveillance technology powered South Korea’s COVID-19 response ‘, Brookings, 29 April 2020, available at https://www.brookings.edu/techstream/how-surveillance-technology-poweredsouthkoreas-COVID-19-response/, accessed on 11 July 2020.
  12. Ibid.
  13. Ibid.
  14. Sebastian Klovig Skelton, ‘Surveillance capitalism in the age of COVID-19’, ComputerWeeklycom, 13 May 2020, available at https://www.computerweekly.com/feature/Surveillance-capitalism-in-the-age-ofCOVID-19, accessed on 10 July 2020.
  15. Ethical considerations to guide the use of digital proximity tracking technologies for COVID-19 contact tracing (Interim guidance), 28 May 2020, p.2, available at WHO/2019-nCoV/Ethics_Contact_tracing_ apps/2020.1.;WHO contact tracing (n 5), p. 4.
  16. WHO contact tracing (n 5), p. 4.
  17. Ibid.
  18. Nick Statt, ‘Gulf states using COVID-19 contact tracing apps as mass surveillance tools, report says’, The Verge, 16 June 2020, available at https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/16/21293363/COVID-19-contacttracingbahrain-kuwait-mass-surveillance-tools-privacy-invasion, accessed on 1 July 2020.
  19. Natasha Lomas, Norway pulls its coronavirus contacts-tracing app after privacy watchdog’s warning, TechCrunch, 15 June 2020, available at https://techcrunch.com/2020/06/15/norway-pulls-its-coronaviruscontactstracing-app-after-privacy-watchdogs-warning/, accessed on 23 July 2020.
  20. Tom Bateman, ‘Coronavirus: Israel turns surveillance tools on itself ’, BBC,12 May 2020, available at https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-52579475, accessed on 3 July 2020.
  21. Ibid.
  22. ‘Coronavirus: Israeli court bans lawless contact tracing’, BBC, 27 April 2020, available at https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-52439145, accessed on 23 July 2020.
  23. Aadil Brar, ‘COVID-19 Boosts India’s Growing Surveillance State’, The Diplomat, 14 April 2020, available at https://thediplomat.com/2020/04/COVID-19-boosts-indias-growing-surveillance-state/, accessed on 10 July 2020.
  24. Ibid.
  25. Alex Hern, ‘Digital contact tracing will fail unless privacy is respected, experts warn’, The Guardian, 20 April 2020, available at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/20/coronavirus-digital-contacttracingwill-fail-unless-privacy-is-respected-experts-warn, accessed on 19 July 2020.
  26. Douglas Busvine, ‘Rift opens over European coronavirus contact tracing apps’, Reuters, 20 April 2020, available at https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-health-coronavirus-europe-tech-idUKKBN2221U6, accessed on 28 July 2020.
  27. Serge Vaudenay, ‘Analysis of DP3T: Between Scylla and Charybdis’, Cryptology
  28. ePrint Archive, 8 April 2020, available at https://eprint.iacr.org/eprintbin/getfile.
  29. pl?entry=2020/399&version=20200409:125022&file=399.pdf, accessed on 28 July 2020.
  30. ‘Mobile Location Data and COVID-19: Q&A’, Human Rights Watch, 14 April 2020, available at https:// www.hrw.org/news/2020/05/13/mobile-location-data-and-COVID-19-qa, accessed on 1 July 2020; Danny Bradbury, ‘Rights groups appeal to governments over COVID-19 surveillance’, Naked security by SOPHOS, 2020, available at https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2020/04/06/rights-groups-appeal-togovernmentsover-COVID-19%20surveillance/, accessed on 10 July 2020.
  31. Steven Swinford, ‘Privacy has never been an absolute right: U.K. electronic spy agency urges Facebook, Twitter, to help stop terrorists’, The Telegraph, 2014, available at http://news.nationalpost.com/news/ privacy-was-never-an-absolute-right-u-k-electronic-spy-agency-urges-facebook-twitter-to-help-stopterrorists, accessed on 10 July 2020.
  32. Kenneth Einar Himma, ‘Why Security Trumps Privacy’, in Adam D Moore (ed), Privacy, Security and Accountability Ethics, Law and Policy, Rownman & Littlefield International Ltd, Lanham, 2016, p. 148.
  33. See Walter Peissl, ‘Surveillance and Security: A Dodgy Relationship’, Journal of Contingencies & Crisis Management p. 19, volume 11:1, 2003; See Cary Stacy Smith and Li-Chung Hung, The Patriot Act issues and controversies, Charles C Thomas Publisher, Springfield, 2010.
  34. Krystal Lynn Conniry, ‘National Security, Mass Surveillance, and Citizen Rights under Conditions of Protracted Warfare’, Master of Science, Portland State University, 2016, p. 7.
  35. Lseamnesty, ‘Privacy advocate and security expert clash at debate over mass surveillance’, LSE Su Amnesty International, 2016, available at https://lseamnestyinternational.wordpress.com/2016/02/12/ privacy-advocate-and-security-expert-clash-at-debate-over-mass-surveillance/, accessed on 1 August 2020.
  36. See B Carlton and Jude Mcculloch, ‘Preempting justice: suppressing of financing of terrorism and the “war on terror”’, Current Issues in Criminal Justice p. 397, volume 17:3, 2006.
  37. House of Lords Select Committee on the Constitution, Surveillance: Citizens and the State, 2008-2009, United Kingdom, volume 1, p. 24, para. 92.
  38. ‘COVID-19 Apps Pose Serious Human Rights Risks’, Human Rights Watch, 2020, available at https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/05/13/COVID-19-apps-pose-serious-human-rights-risks, accessed on 1 July 2020.
  39. Paul Schwartz, ‘Protecting privacy on COVID-19 surveillance apps’, Iapp, 2020, available at https://iapp.org/news/a/protecting-privacy-on-covid-surveillance-apps/ , accessed on 11 July 2020.
  40. Sander van der Linden, ‘How the Illusion of Being Observed Can Make You a Better Person’, Scientific American, 2011, available at http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-the-illusion-of-beingobservedcan-make-you-better-person/ accessed on 26 July 2020; See Ryan Calo, ‘People Can Be So Fake: A New Dimension to Privacy and Technology Scholarship’, Penn State Law Review, p.1, volume 114:3, 2010, available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=1458637, accessed on 2 August 2020.
  41. Surveillance: Citizens and the State (n 35), p. 26, para. 100.
  42. See Jeffrey Rosen, ‘Out of context: the purposes of privacy’, Social Research p. 209, volume 68:1, 2001.
  43. See Titus Stahl, ‘Indiscriminate mass surveillance and the public sphere’, Ethics and Information Technology p. 33, volume 18:1, 2016.
  44. Moira Paterson, ‘Surveillance in Public Places and the Role of the Media: Achieving an Optimal Balance’, Media and Arts Law Review p. 241, volume 14:3, 2009, p. 249.
  45. Clive Norris & Gary Armstrong, ‘CCTV and the Social Structuring of Surveillance’, Crime Prevention Studies p. 157, volume 10, 1999, p. 175.
  46. Dhakshayini Sooriyakumaran, ‘Surveillance will not save us from COVID-19’, Al Jazeera, 21 May 2020, available at https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/surveillance-saveCOVID-19-200520095528251.html , accessed on 3 July 2020.
  47. Ibid.
  48. David Murakami Wood, ‘A Report on the Surveillance Societ For the Information Commissioner by the Surveillance Studies Network’, 2006, p. 3, para. 2.6.
  49. Dhakshayini Sooriyakumaran (n 44).
  50. ‘Five reasons to care about mass surveillance’, Amnesty International, 2015, United Kingdom, available at https://www.amnesty.org.uk/blogs/ether/five-reasons-care-about-mass-surveillance-edward-snowdengchqnsa-citizenfour, accessed on 1 July 2020.
  51. Beverly Gage,’What an uncensored letter to M.L.K. reveals’, The New York Times Magazine, 11 November 2014, available at https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/16/magazine/what-an-uncensored-letter-to-mlkreveals.html, accessed on 1 July 2020.
  52. George Joseph,‘Feds regularly monitored Black Lives Matter since Ferguson’, The Intercept, 2015, available at https://theintercept.com/2015/07/24/documents-show-department-homeland-security-monitoringblacklives-matter-since-ferguson/, accessed on 1 July 2020.
  53. Surveillance: Citizens and the State (n 35), p. 27, para. 105.
  54. Ibid, para. 107.
  55. Ibid, para. 108.
  56. Pieter Kleve et.al, ‘Surveillance technology and law: the social impact’, International Journal of Intercultural Information Management p. 2, volume 1:1, 2007.
  57. See James Carmichael, ‘Google Knows You Better Than You Know Yourself ’, The Atlantic, 19 August 2014, available at https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/08/google-knows-you-betterthanyou-know-yourself/378608/, accessed on 4 August 2020; Jon Evans, ‘When Facebook Knows You Better Than You Know Yourself ’, TechCrunch, 24 October 2015, available at https://techcrunch.com/2015/10/24/when-facebook-knows-you-better-than-you-know-yourself/, accessed on 4 August 2020.
  58. Steven Feldstein, ‘The Global Expansion of AI Surveillance: Distinguishing Between Legitimate and Unlawful Surveillance’, Working Paper, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 17 September 2019, p. 12.
  59. Ibid, p. 13.
  60. Anthony Ha, ‘Edward Snowden’s Privacy Tips: “Get Rid of Dropbox,” Avoid Facebook And Google ‘, TechCrunch, 2014, available at techcrunch.com/2014/10/11/edward-snowden-new-yorker-festival, accessed on 13 July 2020.
  61. Big Brother Watch v. UK, European Court of Human Rights, Judgment, 2018, Application nos. 58170/13, 62322/14 and 24960/15, para. 422.
  62. The Right to Privacy in the Digital Age (n 1), paras.21- 23.
  63. ‘General Comment 27: Freedom of Movement (Article 12)’, UN Doc CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.9, 2 November 1999, paras. 14-15; ‘General Comment No. 16: Article 17 (Right to Privacy), The Right to Respect of Privacy, Family, Home and Correspondence, and Protection of Honour and Reputation’, HRI/GEN/1/Rev.9 (Vol. I), 8 April 1988, paras. 3,4,8; Tooten v Australia, United Nations Human Rights Committee, 1994, Communication No 488/1992, UN Doc CCPR/C/50/D/488/1992, para. 8.3.
  64. Ibid, General Comment No. 16, para. 10.
  65. Roman Zakharov v. Russia, European Court of Human Rights, Judgment, 2015, Application no. 47143/0, para. 228.
  66. Ibid, para. 231; See Huvig v France, European Court of Human Rights, Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction), 1990, Application No 11105/84.
  67. See Liberty and Others v. The United Kingdom, European Court of Human Rights, Judgment, 2008, Application no. 58243/00; Szabo and Vissy v. Hungary, European Court of Human Rights, Judgment, 2016, Application no. 37138/14.
  68. Kieren McCarthy, ‘European human rights court rules mass surveillance illegal’, The Register, 2016, available at http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/01/20/human_rights_court_rules_mass_surveillance_ illegal/, accessed on 31 July 2020.
  69. ‘General Comment No. 34. Article 19: Freedoms of Opinion and Expression’, UN Doc CCPR/C/GC/34, 12 September 2011, para. 25.
  70. Roman Zakharov v. Russia (n 63), para. 231.
  71. The European Convention on Human Rights (formally the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms), 3 September 1953, ETS 5, Rome, 4 November 1950, art. 8(2).
  72. Human Rights Council, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, 17 April, 2013,UN Doc A/HRC/23/40, para. 58.
  73. Zakharov v Russia (n 63), para. 260.
  74. Bernadette Rainey, Elizabeth Wicks, & Clare Ovey, The European Convention on Human Rights, Oxford University Press, United Kingdom, 6th edition, 2014, p. 325.
  75. Case of Fontevecchia y D`Amico v. Argentina, Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Merits, Reparations and Costs, 2011, Series C No. 238, para. 53.
  76. Zakharov v Russia (n 63), para. 48.
  77. Klass and Others v. Germany, European Court of Human Rights, Judgment, 1978, Application no. 5029/71, para. 49.
  78. Korean Constitutional Court’s Decision 2010 Hunma 47, 252 (consolidated) announced 28 August 2012; Korean High Court, October, 2012; Seoul High Court, 2011Na19012.
  79. National Security Law, 1991 (Law No. 51/1991), Romania, art. 13.
  80. The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, 2000, United Kingdom, s. 5. para. 49.
  81. Ben Beaumont, ‘Easy guide to mass surveillance’, Amnesty International, 2015, available at https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2015/03/easy-guide-to-mass-surveillance/, accessed on 12 July 2020.
  82. Zakharov v Russia (n 63).
  83. Szabo and Vissy v Hungary (n 65).
  84. See S and Marper v United Kingdom, European Court of Human Rights, Judgment, Application nos.
  85. /04 and 30566/04.
  86. See Digital Rights Ireland and Seitlinger and Others, Court of Justice of European Union, 2014, Joined Cases C‑293/12 and C‑594/12, para. 58.
  87. Surveillance strategies for COVID-19 human infection, Interim guidance, World Health Organization, 10 May 2020, p. 1c available at WHO/2019-nCoV/National_Surveillance/2020.1.
  88. Marie-Helen Maras, ‘The social consequences of a mass surveillance measure: What happens when we become the ‘others’? ‘, International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice p. 65, volume 40:2, 2012, p. 66.
  89. Robert Higgs, Crisis and Leviathan: Critical Episodes in the Growth of American Government, Oxford University Press, New York, 1989, chp. 4.
  90. Isobel Asher Hamilton, ‘Edward Snowden says COVID-19 could give governments invasive new datacollection powers that could last long after the pandemic’, Business Insider, 27 March 2020, available at https://www.businessinsider.com/edward-snowden-coronavirus-surveillance-new-powers-2020-3, accessed on 3 July 2020.
  91. WHO Ethical Considerations (n 15), p. 1.
  92. Kelly Servick, ‘Cellphone tracking could help stem the spread of coronavirus Is privacy the price?’, Science, 2020, available at https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/03/cellphone-tracking-could-helpstemspread-coronavirus-privacy-price, accessed on 3 July 2020.
  93. Yuval Noah Harari, ‘Yuval Noah Harari: the world after coronavirus’, Financial Times, 2020, available at https://www.ft.com/content/19d90308-6858-11ea-a3c9-1fe6fedcca75, accessed on 13 July 2020.
  94. Ibid.
  95. Ibid.
  96. Ibid.
  97. Ibid.
  98. Dhakshayini Sooriyakumaran (n 44).
  99. Berel Wein, ‘The Black Death’, JewishHistoryorg, available at https://www.jewishhistory.org/the-blackdeath/, accessed on 4 August 2020.
  100. Press Release, ‘Secretary-General Denounces ‘Tsunami’ of Xenophobia Unleashed amid COVID-19, Calling for All-Out Effort against Hate Speech’, SG/SM/20076 United Nations, 8 May 2020, available at https://www.un.org/press/en/2020/sgsm20076.doc.htm, accessed on 13 2020.
  101. WHO contact tracing (n 5), p. 4.
  102. Daniel Kahn Gillmor, ‘ACLU White Paper — Principles for Technology-Assisted Contact-Tracing’, ACLU, 2020, available at https://www.aclu.org/report/aclu-white-paper-principles-technology-assistedcontacttracing, accessed on 16 July 2020.
  103. Ibid.
  104. Bradbury (n 28).
  105. WHO Ethical Considerations (n 15), pp. 2-5.
  106. Ibid.
  107. Ibid.
  108. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 10 December 1948, UNGA 217 A (III), art. 19; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 23 March 1976, 999 UNTS 171, New York, adopted 16 December 1966, art. 19; American Convention on Human Rights, 18 July 1978, O.A.S. Treaty Series No. 36, 1144 U.N.T.S. 123, San Jose, 22 November 1969, art. 13.
  109. ‘Right to Information: A Tool for People Power’, Transparency International, 2019, available at https:// www.transparency.org/en/news/right-to-information-people-power#, accessed on 28 July 2020.
  110. Gomes‐Lund et al. (Guerrilha do Araguaia) v. Brazil, Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, 2010, Series C No. 219, para. 230.
  111. Surveillance: Citizens and the State (n 35), p. 89, para. 383.
  112. Vera Rusinova , ‘A European Perspective on Privacy and Mass Surveillance at the Crossroads’, WP BRP 87/ LAW/2019, National Research University Higher School of Economics, 2019, p. 3, available at https:// papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3347711#, accessed on 2 July 2020.
  113. Szabó and Vissy (n 65); Sarah St. Vincent, ‘Did the European Court of Human Rights Just Outlaw “ Massive Monitoring of Communications” in Europe?’, Center for Democracy and Technology, 2016, available at https://cdt.org/blog/did-the-european-court-of-human-rights-just-outlaw-massive-monitoring-ofcommunicationsin-europe/, accessed on 28 July 2020.
  114. ‘If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear’: MP accused of quoting Nazi leader’, TheJournalie, 2015, available at https://www.thejournal.ie/surveillance-bill-goebbels-2426368-Nov2015/, accessed on 4 August 2020.
  115. Mike Giglio, ‘Would You Sacrifice Your Privacy to Get Out of Quarantine?’, The Atlantic, 22 April 2020, available at https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/04/coronavirus-pandemic-privacy-civilliberties911/609172/, accessed on 3 August 2020.
  116. See J Kluger, ‘A Pandemic of Misinformation’,Time, volume 196(5-6), 2020, pp. 17-18.