Finland: New surveillance law threatens fundamental rights (2015)
edri.org
edri.org
A) The parliament accepts the change by a simple majority vote, and the change will "rest" until the next election. After the election, the change will pass with a 2/3 majority vote by the new parliament.
B) The parliament deems that the change is urgent by at least a 5/6 majority vote. Then the change will be voted upon and will pass with a 2/3 majority vote.
Finland is not “changing the constitution“. Not yet, at least. Such a change has been _proposed_ by a group appointed by the ministry of justice, and is now being _discussed_ in public. None of the above steps to actually change the constitution has taken place yet. I find it unlikely that a 2/3 majority vote for a change like this can be achieved with the currently elected parliament.
The annoying thing I find about the news coverage about this is that they make it sound like it's already decided. We're seeing headlines to the tune of ”here are the new wiretap rights for Finnish Security Service”. It is not decided yet.
I was like "wtf" when I read this article. As a Swedish citizen, the article got me a bit worried.
However, here the thing is that the discussion in Finland is about "following the Swedish model", because in Sweden the FRA (Försvarens Radioanstalt) has permission to do things that the corresponding Finnish authorities would like to get.
One can always hope that the Finns will reject this dumbfounded proposal, giving an example to the Swedes to repeal their corresponding law.
If this change were to pass, however, there will be little internet related tech locating to Finland, which is what the government is actually hoping to happen.
Also of interest are the reasons behind the proposed change. There has been little to none "national security" issues in Finland, so it's somewhat odd to see it pushed as the main reason.
The director of the surveillance police has actually stated in the past that they rely a lot on information passed to them from other surveillance agencies, and that they don't really have anything to give back. I think this is more about amassing data for exchanges between agencies, rather than an any actual threat.
For example, the Google data center in Hamina directly employs about 125 people. The taxes are limited to salaries, power, etc. I'm pretty sure (although didn't check) that the data center is not turning a profit, even though it probably does generate a tremendous amount of money for Google.
Yes, this vision has been thrown about, but they thing is, even if the wildest predictions were to come through, the employment generated by these large-scale datacenters is a small fraction of the jobs lost in other industries. And most of these jobs are relatively low-paying ones such as perimeter security, replacing faulty servers etc. A far cry from, say, the hordes of engineers employed by the telecom sector during the boom years.
Sure, they may indirectly generate a lot of jobs, but you don't need to live next to (or even in the same country as) an Amazon, Google, or whomever's, gigantic datacenter in order to use it.
But converting factories to data centres would be a way to avoid demolition, and create a demand for specialised tech knowledge and make Finland somewhat relevant to the internet, which is what the government is after.
Here it is like with surveillance cameras. They won't jump down from the pole to help you. Still they are all over now being sold with the argument of protection.
It is also quite clear that Russia is having various operations where they try to affect the public opinion for example through forum posts. Would be probably quite useful to be able to monitor these as well.
Of course, as usual, on the other side you then have the peoples right to privacy and I'm not sure if the pros outweigh the cons.
In general the principle in Finland is that we can't setup ultimate defense against Russia. We can only try to build up defense, which makes attacking us too costly.
So… did they alter the constitution?
The draft/proposal is dated to Jan 2015 [1] (it's in Swedish, sorry), and it was in the works, and came up again today on the newspapers after the Minister of Justice called for a debate on this. Here's an up to date article on this: http://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/working_group_tables_const...
EDIT: add sources.
[1]: http://www.defmin.fi/sv/uppgifter_och_verksamhet/lagstiftnin...