[GA - Defeated] End Excessive Data Retention Act [Complete]

BMWSurfer

Some random groundhog idk
-
TNP Nation
Veniyerris
Discord
BMWSurfer#1965

ga.jpg

End Excessive Data Retention Act
Category: Human Rights | Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Avgrunden | Onsite Topic



The General Assembly:

Recognizing that communications providers are being required by some governments to retain electronic data of their customers for an extended period of time.

Acknowledging that legitimate law enforcement often requires the cooperation of communications providers to combat crime and terrorism.

Concerned that forced data retention laws are imposing excessive costs on communications providers specifically, and on the technology sector generally.

Troubled that, absent reasonable restrictions, forced data retention could be abused by law enforcement to invade individual privacy.

Further troubled that, absent reasonable restrictions, forced data retention could compromise data security through leaks, hacks, and data breaches.

Affirming that an appropriate balance must be struck between the interests of privacy and the interests of law enforcement;

The General Assembly Hereby:

  1. Defines, for the purposes of this resolution:
    • "Communications Provider" as any business, such as an internet service provider, that engages in the service of transferring electronic data.
    • "Data" as any electronic information derived from a customer's use of a communications provider's services.
    • "Data Retention Law" as any government mandate requiring communications providers to retain all customer data for a period of time..
    • "Data Retention Request" as any government action requesting that a communications provider retain a specific customer's data for a period of time.
  2. Prohibits:
    • World Assembly Member States from enacting or enforcing data retention laws that require communications providers to retain all customer data for a period greater than 90 days.
    • World Assembly Member States from making a data retention request absent a showing of reasonable need for a specific customer's data in a law enforcement or national security investigation.
  3. Requires:
    • World Assembly Member States to establish procedures through which citizens and communications providers can challenge the legality of the state's data retention laws.
    • World Assembly Member States to establish procedures through which communications providers can challenge a data retention request.
  4. Does Not:
    • Prevent communications providers from voluntarily storing customer data for periods greater than 90 days.
    • Proscribe the exact procedures by which a World Assembly Member State is to comply with Sections 3a and 3b.



Voting Instructions:
  • Vote For if you want the Delegate to vote For the resolution.
  • Vote Against if you want the Delegate to vote Against the resolution.
  • Vote Abstain if you want the Delegate to abstain from voting on this resolution.
  • Vote Present if you are personally abstaining from this vote.

Detailed opinions with your vote are appreciated and encouraged!

[wavote=the_north_pacific,ga]2018_04_20_end_excessive_data_retention_act[/wavote]
[wavote=world,ga]2018_04_20_end_excessive_data_retention_act[/wavote]
 
Before us is a well-intentioned proposal that would ensure that states cannot force companies to keep excessive amounts of data on consumers. However, good intentions do not make a good proposal. The proposal often uses vague terms and language that makes it difficult to read. Additionally, we believe that this is not an issue worthy of being brought before this esteemed Assembly.
For these reasons the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends a vote Against the proposal.
 
BMWSurfer:
Acknowledging that the interests of law enforcement and national security require the cooperation of communications providers to combat crime and terrorism.
I beg to differ, and for that reason:
Against
 
Against

This is just another national issue. The author fails to prove how data retention is an essential human right necessitating such strict protections.

That being said, why 90 days?


Reading up on the topic of data laws, and reading a post by the author on the forum convinces me that there may be some merit in this topic. However, the logic falls through when one considers the notion that nations outside the WA aren't bounded by these laws, and thus a person's data can just be retrieved from there.
 
Against.

The proposal is just too vague and in some cases, contradictory to itself.
 
Against

Though, I would support another resolution that is more specific and addresses the specific issues that this resolution is trying to overcome.
 
Voting on this resolution has ended.

Thanks to those nations who cast their votes. Your participation is a great help to the region.

This topic has been locked and sent to the Archives for safekeeping. If you would like this topic to be re-opened for further discussion, please contact the WA Delegate, a Global Moderator, or an Administrator for assistance. Thank you.
 
Back
Top