..MY FINAL ASSIGNMENT...!!

THE SUMMARY OF THE 1980 OECD PRIVACY GUIDELINES?

The OECD principles on privacy have an importance extending far beyond their subject matter. It concerns the capacity of law making institutions in democratic societies to respond to large and complex developments of global technology.Let me remind you that this was a novel initiative for that hard nosed international body of economists and statisticians. The OECD had grown out of the Marshall Plan, by which the economies of Western Europe had been rescued from devastation by the drive, generosity and capital of the United States of America. As such, the OECD was not a body concerned with human rights. It could leave such nebulous and contentious topics to the Council of Europe, the European Court of Human Rights or the neverending debates in the United Nations, including in its agency UNESCO, meeting in Paris on the other side of the river Seine. The concern which propelled the OECD into the issues of privacy was the fear that its member states would introduce incompatible and conflicting laws for the defence of privacy in the newly established databases of the interlinked information technologies. The fear that this would result in serious barriers to the generally free flow of data across the borders of the member states of the OECD and beyond was the cause that brought together the Expert Group oN.......
KEY PROVISIONS OF THE USA PATRIOT ACT SUBJECT TO SUNSET?
The clumsily-titled Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (USA PATRIOT Act, or USAPA) introduced a plethora of legislative changes which significantly increased the surveillance and investigative powers of law enforcement agencies in the United States. The Act did not, however, provide for the system of checks and balances that traditionally safeguards civil liberties in the face of such legislation.

One of the most striking features of the USA PATRIOT Act is the lack of debate surrounding its introduction. Many of the provisions of the Act relating to electronic surveillance were proposed before September 11th, and were subject to much criticism and debate. John Podesta, White House Chief of Staff from 1998 - 2001, has questioned what has changed since then.

The events of September 11 convinced ... overwhelming majorities in Congress that law enforcement and national security officials need new legal tools to fight terrorism. But we should not forget what gave rise to the original opposition - many aspects of the bill increase the opportunity for law enforcement and the intelligence community to return to an era where they monitored and sometimes harassed individuals who were merely exercising their First Amendment rights. Nothing that occurred on September 11 mandates that we return to such an era.However, the USA PATRIOT Act retains provisions appreciably expanding government investigative authority, especially with respect to the Internet. Those provisions address issues that are complex and implicate fundamental constitutional protections of individual liberty, including the appropriate procedures for interception of information transmitted over the Internet and other rapidly evolving technologies.The USA PATRIOT does contain a provision requiring law enforcement to file under seal with the court a record of installations of pen register/trap and trace devices. This amendment may provide some measure of judicial oversight of the use of this enhanced surveillance authority.PATRIOT Act Renewal Bill Would Expand FBI Powers . Reuters reports that Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts (R-KS) plans to introduce legislation that would not only reauthorize sunsetting provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act, but also expand the government's investigative powers to permit the FBI to demand health, library, and tax records in intelligence investigations without judicial approval......