Data Retention and the DRD

The data retenton directive was voted in to law just a few days ago here in Norway and I do not know how to feel about it. On one side I feel as I should be against it because I do not want anyone to retain information about me, but on the other side I feel that it is the right thing to do because it may prevent serious criminal activity.

To me there is little doubt that there is need for this directive. It was agreed between EU member states after the New York, Madrid and later London terrorist attacks that there was a need for such a directive. It was voted in to law in 2006 in the EU, but here in Norway it was voted in to law just last week, april 4^th 2011. Our version of the Directive is slightly more liberal because the Government can only store data for 6 months, whereas within the EU they are required by law to retain the data for a minimum of 6 months and up to two years.

This video explains what information the Norwegian Government wants to retain:

For telephone calls, they want to save information like:

• Who you are talking to
• How long you are talking to them
• Where you are when you are talking to someone
• Technical details about your phone device

For internet use they want to retain the following information:

• When you are online
• Your IP address
• How long you are online
• Who you e-mail and when
• Information about your computer

All this information can be used against you if you or someone you have communicated with have committed a crime.

They government claims that nobody outside will have access to the information retained, so it should be safe and secure. However, how much can we really trust the government? Just last month I read an article about the practice of POT, now the Norwegian Police Security Service, hadled evidence. A guy who had since retired kept evidence in his personal safe, at his own home for years.

It is episodes like that which makes the DRD a tough pill to swallow for opponents. But they also argue that the principles of the DRD are bad. In the past, the police needed a reason to investigate you, and a court order to be allowed to monitor your activities. Now, the data is already there for them, going back six months. StoppDLD, one of the leading organizations who tried to prevent the implementation of the directive, argued that in a free and open society, one should not have to be monitored by anyone if you have not done anything wrong. But even they agree that there is little doubt that the data retention directive will be useful when trying to catch criminals or even terrorists.

But still. Norway, as well as the majority of the EU member states, are liberal democracies. That does not mean that they are all run by liberal governments, but it means that we have certain indisputable rights, and the right to privacy is listed as one of them.

What do you think: Are you for or against the Data Retention Directive? Are you concerned that someone may look at your activities even if you know that you have not done anything wrong?