- How Custom Software Can Boost Your Business
We all want the best for our business. We want to help it grow, drive it forwards to make an impact and through tha...
Mossack Fonseca argues that the roles of Panama threaten their privacy and that of their customers, but Privacy International differs.
After the revelations of the papers Panama (million documents from the law firm Panamanian Mossack Fonseca were analyzed for over a hundred media worldwide, revealing a network of political leaders and celebrities who use tax havens to protect their money), Ramon Fonseca, co-founder of the firm, gave statements according which filtration is “an attack on privacy ” of the firm and its customers. However, Privacy International , an international organization dedicated to the defense of the right to privacy, differ from that criterion, stating:
The scandal, however, is not about privacy. In any case, it is about the need for transparency around how powerful flaunt their power. Need-and good transparency, strong research- to understand where and how it is eroded our right to privacy
In its statement, Privacy International develops the notion that privacy and transparency are not mutually exclusive concepts , but, on the contrary, interdependent preserve the privacy of citizens requires a degree minimum of transparency in the exercise of public office, in compliance with government and institutional tasks:
the privacy and transparency are not opposites. They are two faces of the same coin. As privacy advocates, we use the capabilities of transparency to investigate surveillance. Meanwhile, privacy as a right requires transparency of institutions that collect and utlizan our data.
This false dichotomy has been used again and again as an excuse to overshadow mechanisms exercise of power , creating a conceptual contradiction, a society in which the public is private and vice versa. In the terms proposed by the organization,
what Fonseca really does is defend a status quo of ‘privacy for kings, transparency for beggars’
the protection of privacy as a mechanism to safeguard the actions of those in power results not only corruption and lack of accountability for the actions of the powerful , but also potential violation of the privacy of citizens, because the organs of power left to their air incurred in using that power for monitoring and disproportionate control.
Similarly, it is ironic that tax systems in many countries including the ability to collect a huge amount of data of ordinary citizens , while those who hold a large capital to use privacy as a shield to evade their tax obligations and divert fortunes whose origins in many cases, they are more than suspected. And highlights Privacy International that for the average citizen, our financial systems are monitored by default, undermined by intelligence agencies, each of our stored and tagged transactions: need to deliver our personal information to open accounts, and our credit history is thoroughly examined .
we should never make the mistake of combining the right to privacy of the individual with the individual desire to hide dark, ethically questionable activities bordering the illegal for the immensely rich and powerful.
one way or another, which Privacy international alleges, in line with the international law of human rights and universal democratic principles, is that information considered of public interest (such as on tax collection and tax evasion and transforming public assets into personal wealth) is and should be public information , and as such, open to be analyzed and studied by the general public and the media.
April 12, 2016
- ← Take-Two has a counterclaim against Leslie Benzies
- “Ich will Nonne werden ‘beweist, dass man ohne Rückgriff eine gute Realität machen kann trospidez →