Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Monday September 26 2016, @05:41AM   Printer-friendly
from the watch-out-for-scope-creep dept.

Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:

Swiss voters have given a strong approval to a law on new surveillance powers for the intelligence agencies.

The new law would allow the authorities to tap phones, snoop on email and deploy hidden cameras and bugs.

It would help Switzerland catch up with other countries, supporters say.

Opponents have feared it could erode civil liberties and put Swiss neutrality at risk by requiring closer co-operation with foreign intelligence agencies.

Some 65.5% of voters agreed to accept the proposal. It will allow the Federal Intelligence Service and other agencies to put suspects under electronic surveillance if authorised by a court, the defence ministry and the cabinet.

The big vote in favour of new powers for the intelligence services shows just how concerned the Swiss have become about a possible militant attack.

For decades, ever since a scandal in the 1980s in which Switzerland's government was revealed to have been spying on tens of thousands of its citizens, the Swiss have been sceptical about state surveillance. CCTV cameras are rare; even Google Street View is restricted because of Swiss privacy laws.

But the dreadful events in neighbouring France have changed many Swiss minds. Despite arguments from opponents that increased surveillance would not automatically increase security, voters handed huge new powers to their intelligence services.

The Swiss government says the powers would be used about once a month to monitor the highest-risk suspects.

The new law was not comparable to the spying capabilities of the US or other major powers, which "go well beyond what is desired in terms of individual liberty and security for our citizens", Defence Minister Guy Parmelin said earlier this year.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Monday September 26 2016, @07:54PM

    by tangomargarine (667) on Monday September 26 2016, @07:54PM (#406729)

    Well, it was one of the foundational principles of the country. It's not my fault people don't seem to put much stock in them anymore :P

    --
    "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by dry on Tuesday September 27 2016, @02:52AM

    by dry (223) on Tuesday September 27 2016, @02:52AM (#406822) Journal

    The founding principles of the USA was that rich white men had personal liberty. Natives, dumb savages without even the right to have treaties honoured. Black people, well they did compromise that they were worth 3/5ths of a person for Congressional districts, other then that they pretty well had zero rights in a good chunk of the country and in practice have always had fewer rights then white people.
    Today, it is not uncommon to see Americans claiming that rights only belong to Americans and this is reflected in the number of foreigners that are summarily executed by America.