Amirah/ Evaluative

How far should a state have a right to monitor the actions of people within its borders?

The state should have the right to monitor the actions of people within its borders if it infringes the nation’s security. It is the government’s obligation to ensure its people’s welfare is not thwarted by external and internal threats, thus the government would have to monitor the actions of its people to achieve security. By monitoring its people’s actions, the government would be fully informed of any misdoings and suspicious activities should it be carried out. Such insidious acts would be detrimental to a nation’s harmony and may affect the sense of security citizens have of their nation. For example, the state should have the right to monitor terrorist activities as terrorism has the ability to put the welfare of the whole nation in a vulnerable spot. Hence, the government has the right to monitor the actions of people with its borders if thwart the nation’s security. However, the government should not have the right to monitor the action of people within its border as it invades one’s human rights and limits personal freedom. If the government were to monitor the actions of every individual, many would feel unhappy and choose to disrespect the government. This would lead to social unrest and instability of a nation should the problem get out of hand. For example, the FBI in USA proposed a widespread monitoring and screening of every phone call within its borders in 2008. This was met with heavy criticism and evoked unpleasant feelings among citizens towards the government causing many to question the government. Hence, the government should not monitor if it infringes one’s personal freedom. However, the nation’s security is more important than one’s personal freedom as it holds the whole country’s well-being at stake. Thereby, the government should monitor the actions of people within its border if it threatens the nation’s security.