Hacker News Reader

Comment by danbruc | Hacker News Reader

There are of course differences in the treatment of citizens and non-citizens and this for good reasons like controlling immigration. But there should be no differences when it comes to human rights including privacy rights and this is what I complain about - different treatment as to human rights. And this goes beyond spying and also includes for example torturing people in Guantanamo. And yes, not only the US are breaking foreign law, but this does not at all justify this behavior.

View on HN

There are no differences, both in practice and in theory, to the privacy rights of citizens and non-citizens. Everyone is spied on, and it is legal. The NSA is tasked with spying on foreign nationals. The FBI is tasked with spying on US nationals. Everyone seems to be getting caught up with these legal technicalities. Our agencies spy on everyone they can (as probably does every spy agency in the world). Our government might not even be aware of or in control of it.

This is the hypocracy we all accept as OK. If citizens are barred from travelling internally we call it a human rights violation (USSR, China). If foreigners are barred from travelling between countries we call it "important reasons - immigration control". Same with spying, assasination, torture, killing civilians in war, etc. Human rights don't apply to non-citizens of just about any country.

Unfortunately we don't live in the world you imagine but I would join you in trying to improve the world we actually live in. I don't see how a trade and travel embargo could possibly help - it would almost certainly make things worse! Clearly there is no actual right to privacy under international law and rules vary greatly by country and are often weak in practice[1]. This is want we need to change either through treaties, constitutions or laws. I don't know where you live but in the US it would probably take a constitional amendment - a very difficult procedure - or a very broad decision by the Supreme Court - unlikely.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_law

The thing about isolating the USA was not meant as a real solution, it was just to illustrate my feelings. See also this comment [1] of mine for a clarification.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) [1] contains privacy right in article 12 [3]. The UDHR is not legally binding but the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) [4] is and contains the privacy rights, too. The USA signed and ratified the ICCPR. Maybe someone should just sue all the spying nations.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6643253

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_...

[3] http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml

[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Covenant_on_Civil...

What's interesting with these declarations (and I'm surprised they don't even get a mention in the media) is that they specifically say that these rights cannot be denied based on "national or social origin". So it's basically illegal for the US to invade the privacy of foreign citizens according to the terms of those covenants. The US Constitution is probably in direct violation of it as far as I can tell since it specifically only applies to Americans.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com