BANGKOK, Thailand — Government surveillance—to monitor movement during the COVID-19 pandemic and for national security—puts people's privacy at risk and contributes to shrinking civic spaces, according to a paper published by Civic Futures, an initiative focused on civic spaces and security overreach.
The paper "Resistance and Alternatives to the 'Wars' on Civic Space in the Philippines" argues that surveillance systems like national IDs and security camera networks, and proposed measures like real-name registration on social media accounts, may make people less likely to engage on issues and participate in public decision-making.
Related Stories
It notes that while surveillance is generally understood to be active and targeted, it can also be done through "the acquisition, processing, generation, analysis, use, retention or storage of information about large numbers of people," whether or not they are suspected of any wrongdoing.
"[T]he mere establishment of surveillance measures and legislation, notwithstanding the implementation or the effectiveness of such measures, as their mere existence pushes people to self-regulate for fear of being apprehended," the paper reads.
"Several surveillance technologies were acquired and used during the COVID-19 pandemic, most of which were justified by the government with the need to monitor public places for quarantine monitoring," the paper, which focused on securitization during the Duterte administration, also says.
"These include the installation of surveillance camera networks, some equipped with artificial intelligence technology to detect real-time movement of residents and the deployment of camera drones by police to detect quarantine violations," the paper adds, noting that these technologies are "susceptible to misuse as tools for the unlawful monitoring of vulnerable groups and ordinary citizens."
READ: Almost 90% of Filipinos 'satisfied' with democracy in the country — SWS
'Function creep' of ID systems
ID systems—on the national and local government levels —and other registration schemes are meanwhile susceptible to "function creep", or the use of data collected for a specific purpose for "ever-expanding and undisclosed purposes."
The National ID—also called the Philippine Identification System or PhilSys—has, for example, "been named as a possible tool for aid distribution during the pandemic by the Department of Social Welfare and Development, for vaccine distribution by the National Economic Development Authority,and, unsurprisingly, for law enforcement by the Philippine National Police."
In its Privacy Policy, the Philippine Statistics Authority says it "respects your privacy and recognizes the need for appropriate measures to protect and manage the personal data you entrusted us" and assures the public that personal data is safe "against natural dangers such as accidental loss or destruction, and human dangers such as unlawful or unauthorized access, fraudulent use, unlawful destruction, alteration, and contamination thereof."
It says it can share this data with government agencies like the DSWD, Government Service Insurance System, Social Security System, Philippine Health Insurance Corp. and Pag-IBIG. The data can also be shared with "partners such as accredited banks and financial providers; and Service/solution providers."
The Department of Information and Communications Technology is also developing a "super app" that will integrate all government transactions and will, according to reports, also offer a digital version of the driver's license.
"We appreciate the way the super app functions similarly to a wallet, containing all government identification cards, among other things, within your mobile device," Jay Art Tugade, chief of the Land Transportation Office that issues driver's licenses, said of the initiative.
RELATED: LTO, DICT to launch digital driver’s license
Online freedoms
Measures like real-name registration meant to protect online users from scammers and from disinformation can also lower civic participation, the paper notes.
"Certain sectors of civil society such as queer activists are in higher danger of being disenfranchised by these surveillance measures due to their reliance on anonymous platforms to express their lived identities, as opposed to the legal identities that real-name policies force on internet users," it reads.
Then-President Rodrigo Duterte vetoed a bill for mandatory SIM Card registration in April 2022 because "the inclusion of social media providers in the registration requirement was not part of the original version of the bill and needs a more thorough study."
At least one bill has been filed at the House of Representatives during the 19th Congress to require social media users to submit IDs when creating accounts.
RELATED: Author of social media registration bill decries 'too much democracy' online
During the pandemic lockdowns, the Philippine National Police said they would monitor social media accounts to check for quarantine violations.
Emergency legislation meanwhile included penalties for spreading "false information", a provision that led to the arrest in Cebu City in April 2020 of artist Maria Victoria Beltran for a satirical Facebook post saying "[the city is] now the epicenter in the whole Solar System."
At the Internet Freedom in Southeast Asia conference in Bangkok last week, Zachary Lampell of the International Center for Not-for-Profit Law noted that "governments have a real reason to combat disinformation but they may not understand that that may have on communities," adding policy-makers should understand that "societies need a free and open internet."
Dr. Marc Piñol Rovira, research manager for the Asia Centre research institute that organized the conference, said that discussions on internet freedom should also look into "the right to use the internet for political mobilization, persuasion and expression that is either restricted or denied."
The Civic Futures paper stresses that changes in technology should prompt a review of the concept of civic space to include a right to privacy that goes beyond keeping sensitive information safe but "extends to freedom from active monitoring by State actors through established systems of surveillance that encourage self-regulation and self-censorship."
This, it argues, will give people autonomy and agency "and therefore gives them the freedom to speak out on issues of public concern and participate in public decision making."
--
Disclosure: The author was a panelist at the Internet Freedom in Southeast Asia conference arranged by the Asia Centre and the International Center for Not-for-Profit Law in his personal capacity. This article was produced following editorial guidelines and organizers did not have input on how the story would be written.