Safaricom Security Imbroglio: How Private is our Privacy?

Safaricom Security Imbroglio: How Private is our Privacy?

Atunga Atuti O.J

 

A year ago, Edward Snowden an employee of the US spy agency lifted the lid on an elaborate surveillance and snooping activities on her citizens and foreigners including foreign heads of state and government. This was on account of national security. The question then was why the US would consider foreign sovereigns including her allies a US national security threat to warrant the actions that the government under the National Security Agency (NSA) was involved in. A week back, Vodafone, one of the largest telecommunication companies released a report detailing how governments in the territories it operates pressure telecos to engage in mobile phone communications monitoring.  The report details the grounds on which security agencies routinely  listen into, intercept data or demand for access for communications details regarding customers on their networks ostensibly on account of national security concerns.

 

In the recent past Safaricom, a local subsidiary of Vodafone has been in the news regarding a security contract whereby the Private Communications company is supposed to  develop and deliver a surveillance  infrastructure for one of the security agencies in Kenya. From a business perspective, there is no problem concerning a for-profit company undertaking such a service for a security agency anywhere in the world. In fact most governments especially in the developing countries turn to private companies for such a service. But Safaricom is no ordinary company in Kenya. It is a brand that has built its reputation on secure delivery of data and voice communication.

It is not lost on Kenyans that the same company was contracted in the transmission of Elections results through a system which  collapsed on the weight of results from a few hundred constituencies heightening tensions and accusations of compromise on the part of a section of Kenyan voters.

 

The Security contract and the report by Vodafone on routine interference by security agencies in most of the countries( these were not named on account of security of her employees as well as those of her local subsidiaries) it operates pose a number of security, privacy and human rights issues. First is the right to privacy. The report by Vodafone clearly and boldly states that in most of  the countries it operates, governments authorities require ‘direct access to an operator's network — bypassing legal niceties like warrants and eliminating the need to get case-by-case cooperation from phone-company employees’. Even though it did not name the countries, this is a very worrying trend because it completely circumvents one of the cardinal provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Constitutions of various countries including Kenya. The right to privacy, in essence  the ‘element of various legal traditions which may restrain both government and private party action that threatens the privacy of individuals’. Article 31 of the Constitution of Kenya 2010 is explicit on this matter  and provides thus that .Art 31. [Every person has the right to privacy, which includes the right — not to have— (a) their person, home or property searched;(b) their possessions seized;(c) information relating to their family or private affairs  unnecessarily required or revealed; or (d) the privacy of their communications infringed].

 

 Safaricom is a private company that has operated and experienced exponential growth on account of the  perception that the information that the customers entrust it with is secure and safe from interference. This perception has to a great extent been dented by the Vodafone report. The second issue is the credibility gap-arising partly from the failure in the transmission of the  March 2013 electoral results - and specifically, the extent Safaricom which delivers our communications( data voice and other formats) should be engaged by a party that seeks to  engage in the surveillance of some of her customers whose information and details the company is already entrusted with by the customers. And finally there are questions as whether Safaricom would end up through acts of omission and commission misusing the information it already has about her client to the advantage of or in the service of her client-the Kenya Police Service.

 

As it is, there is already a burgeoning   global backlash against violations of the rights to privacy around the world ignited by the Edward Snowden revelations regarding the NSA, the UK wire-tapping of private conversations including those of the Royal Household, the interception of communications between German Chancellor,  Angela Markel and her colleagues and foreign sovereigns. The fundamental questions  regarding these  developments include the following; first, what is the boundary between the privacy of individuals and  the legitimate desire by government security agencies  to collect information to enhance the security of her citizenry?  Second and more pertinent is the extent to which private citizens like Safaricom and  the mother company Vodafone should be complicity in such violations.

 

While we await the decision of the Kenyan Parliamentary Inquiry into the award of the tender for surveillance to Safaricom, we should initiate debate on the above issues because they have not emerged in the deliberations regarding the contracting of Safaricom – a private company that has legitimate possessions of our information and provides a legitimate infrastructure for communications should engage in activities that seek to spy on her customers. Can Safaricom and other operators in Kenya and around the world assure their customers  in light  of the recent revelations in the Vodafone report, that  they are not  facilitating mass surveillance by giving spies unrestricted access to their networks.

 

 * a version of this opinion was published by the People on Saturday June 14th 2014

--

Atunga Atuti O.J. is a human rights scholar at the Centre for Human Rights and Peace , University of Nairobi andChief Executive Officer,East Afr. School of Human Rights

 

Confessions of a Terrorist: A review

Books &arts

Confessions of a Terrorist: A review

Atunga Atuti O.J.

2014-06-11, Issue 682

http://pambazuka.org/en/category/books/92087

Printer friendly version

The novel goes beyond the prevailing narratives of terrorist behaviour and delves into the thought processes of a terrorist, giving us unique insights into the ‘mind’ of a terrorist.

Title: Confessions of a Terrorist
Author: Richard Jackson
Publisher: Zed-books
Date of Publication: May 2014
Reviewer: Atunga Atuti O.J.

Most of the dominant narratives and explanations of terrorist behaviour and actions from the perspectives international relations, security, literature, media, film, psychology among several other disciplines have always painted the profile of a terrorist as the evil-doer, psychotic character bent on mass murder and destruction, anarchist who thrives on chaos and despondency, enemy of order and stability in the conduct of international relations and diplomacy. Not much has been written in a manner that seeks to address the question as to why terrorists act the way they do. The only ‘ voices of terrorists’ we get to hear are the sanitised ones presented by a movie characters or the media liaison officers of this or that agency that seeks to explain why certain terrorist activity took place. In essence we never get to hear the terrorists themselves explaining the reasons that drive them to take some of the actions they take, the motivations and gaols that drive them to join campaigns of terror.

Richard Jackson, the renowned scholar on security and terrorism at Otago University, New Zealand, has just released his novel, ‘Confessions of a Terrorist’, published in May 2014 by Zed Books, London which seeks to offer terrorists a voice to explicate the motives, goals, and expected outcomes of terrorist activities. It is a ground-breaking work of fiction which challenges the dominant paradigms through which we view terrorist activities. The novel goes beyond the prevailing narratives of terrorist behaviour and delves into the thought processes of a terrorist, giving us unique insights into the ‘mind’ of a terrorist. The plot of the book is straight forward, it rotates around a conversation between a retired intelligence agent Michael of the British Military Intelligence and retired Army operative and Professor Hamid Samir alias Youseff formerly Professor of Economics at Cairo University in Egypt. Professor Youseff leaves behind his beautiful wife and daughter, and highly prestigious position at the University to join a fighters group in Iraq against the US and Allies invasion of the country. What follows, in the entire novel is a conversation between Michael and Professor at a disused factory. Their conversation explores a range of issues both from the perspectives of the terrorist and justification by Michael which is initially and essentially presented in official speak whereby Michael only seems to recount the official explanations proffered by authorities as to justify actions that provoke terrorist reactions. But as the conversation proceeds, it emerges that there is a convergence of perspectives between Michael and Professor as to the motivations that drive each side to take the actions they do.

The book is structured in the form of a top secret security recording transcripts with some sections redacted which makes it interesting reading and especially due to the suspense that the blocked out segments create.

Richard Jackson is the author of several academic and scholarly publications on terrorism. He is also the  founding editor of the journal Critical Studies on Terrorism. But none of his other works as well as those by other scholars stands out in presenting fresh insights into our understanding of the motivations and goals that terror agents are pursuing in their campaigns. As a scholar, of literature, history, diplomacy and human rights, Confessions of a Terrorist is by far the most insightful book I have read on the subject since the beginning of this Century. It creatively weaves together the serious subjects of terrorism, radicalization and extremist violence, discourses on terrorism and current affairs, local and international politics, theory of terrorism into one gripping work of art. It is perhaps going to be the most read book on this subject by a variety of readers both from literature, security, history, diplomacy and contemporary politics.

The book has several redacted ( blacked out) sections ostensibly by security agents so that only the sections that help to advance their perspectives are presented. The use of handwritten annotations by the author helps to give the reader the feel of reading a highly classified ‘top secret’ dossier. Going through the book reminds one of the ‘redacted secret state documents’ we once used to read in Index on Censorship in the 1980s and 1990s when state censorship was rife and in this novel they seeks to illustrate how the authorities try to propagate narratives that reflect their world view and that promote their agendas.

The book is especially useful for the Eastern African Region where many of the countries for instance Kenya and Uganda are battling al-shabbab militants in an environment where the security and especially the anti-terrorism units seem to be chasing shadows. This in view of the fact , there has been a process of recruitment whereby Kenyans of various ethnic origins are joining the terrorist crusade. This is an issue that has baffled many of those who have studied and or followed the rise of terrorism grouping in Eastern Africa. It is a must read for all the intelligence agents tasked with dealing with terrorist threats in Eastern Africa who have in the recent past acted like headless chicken in the face of a wave of terrorist attacks in various parts of Nairobi, the Coastal and Northern Kenya. They must learn to understand the mind of a terrorist and Confessions of a terrorist is essential reading for intelligence analysts and other operatives.

*Atunga Atuti O.J. is the editor of the East African Journal of Human Rights and Democracy email:atunga2020@gmail.com

* THE VIEWS OF THE ABOVE ARTICLE ARE THOSE OF THE AUTHOR/S AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF THE PAMBAZUKA NEWS EDITORIAL TEAM

* BROUGHT TO YOU BY PAMBAZUKA NEWS

* Please do not take Pambazuka for granted! Become a Friend of Pambazuka and make a donation NOW to help keep Pambazuka FREE and INDEPENDENT!

* Please send comments to editor[at]pambazuka[dot]org or comment online at Pambazuka News.

What would you Discusss with a Terrorist if you were in the same room?

Novel demystifies war on terror

Posted by: The People in Entertainment June 1, 2014

Prof Richard Jackson says public and academic knowledge of terrorism is limited and frequently based on ignorance and misinformation, roots for dialogue and negotiations to win fight

By Atunga Atuti O.J.

After reading and reviewing Prof Richard Jackson’s new novel, Confessions of a Terrorist, Executive Director, East African School of Human Rights and Editor, East African Journal of Human Rights ..Atunga Atuti OJ had a candid interview with the author.
Q: As a seasoned academic with many scholarly works to your name, what motivated you to venture into work of fiction on the subject of terrorism?
A: It was a very conscious and deliberate decision to write a novel about terrorism at a particular point in my career. I had never considered it before. A number of factors motivated me. After publishing eight academic books and dozens of articles, I realised that only a very small audience ever read my work and it had very little impact on people lives. Academic publications rarely if ever make a significant impact on wider public debates and political culture. I wanted to get my research out into the wider world and I had to find another medium through which to communicate.
I also noted that there were few novels about terrorism that I could recommend to my students as a way of engaging and informing them about the subject. I came to believe that writing a novel might be a more effective way of both reaching a wider audience and engaging my students through a more exciting and engaging medium. Lastly, I felt that fiction allows for greater freedom in expressing certain ideas and perspectives. The academic form, on the other hand, is often very constricted by the rules and strictures of ‘scientific’ writing.
Q: Was it difficult to discuss the issues raised in the conversation between Professor and Michael in a full length research text-book? What value addition does the genre of a work of fiction (a novel) bring to our understanding of the subject of terrorism?
A: Many of the issues raised in the novel have long been discussed in academic texts, often at great length. The problem is not that such literature doesn’t exist, but rather than it is rarely heard, and if it is heard, it doesn’t always stick to the readers minds. As a consequence, public and academic knowledge of terrorism is limited and frequently based on ignorance and misinformation. The value-added of a novel therefore, is that its form is deliberately affective, emotional and invitational: it asks the reader to identify with the characters and to imagine themselves in similar situations.
It uses drama, tension and emotion to pull the reader into another world where alternative realities can be imagined and experienced. This way, new issues, perspectives and arguments can have a more forceful impact and potentially generate new thinking and perspectives. In this case, a novel in which a terrorist is the central character can function to break down stereotypes and counteract misunderstandings and misconceptions about their motives and mind-set.
Q. Africa is dealing with the issue of radicalisation. This is a subject that your novel addresses. What would be your advice to the government and others, faced with the challenge?
A: The biggest problem we are currently facing in relation to terrorism is that we don’t understand (and often don’t want to understand) the reasons why some people and groups feel the need to violently oppose governments and their policies. And because we don’t understand them, we invent reasons and labels for explaining their actions, such as ‘radicalisation’, religious extremism, fundamentalism and so on. In most cases, these explanations are inadequate and misleading. My advice to any government facing violent insurgency is to first have an honest discussion with both the violent actors and their supporters and the groups they come from, as well as academic experts and local people.
Simply ask them why they are prepared to kill and be killed in this struggle? Ask them what they really want and what it would take for them to stop these violent actions? Once a deep, honest discussion has occurred and an in-depth investigation has been undertaken, it will become clear what the political grievances are and what reforms and changes need to occur for the conflict to end. Dialogue and negotiation is the best way to reduce violent attacks and end campaigns of terrorism in the long-term.
Responding with counterterrorist violence has little-to-no effect on the number of terrorist attacks, in the absence of other measures to address the underlying issues. In fact, in many cases, it can actually escalate the violence further. I think we’ve seen this dynamic at work in the East African region: use of force by the Kenyan government has been met by even greater force from the terrorist groups. It’s a cycle of violence and retaliation that can only be broken and resolved through dialogue.
Q: What is your view of images and narratives of terrorists as ‘martyrs and freedom fighter’ vis-a-vis that of terrorists as ‘irrational evil doers’?
A: In any conflict involving violent resistance, there will always also be a war of words and labels. The government will always call its opponents ‘terrorists’ as a way of trying to delegitimise them and demonise them among the public, as the governments of Ukraine, Syria, Israel and others are currently doing. At the same time, the insurgents and their supporters will refer to themselves as ‘freedom fighters’ and ‘martyrs’. None of these labels are particularly useful; they are not objective descriptors and they don’t help us to better understand the conflict or what motivates the fighting.
In an ideal world, we would find more neutral terms that don’t have such powerful connotations and culturally-laden meanings. More importantly, however, this kind of labelling and its consequences does nothing to reduce or end terrorism; it simply reinforces the current cycle of violence, and in many cases, creates new sources of grievance for the terrorists. The torture in Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay, for example, motivated a great many new terrorists.
Q. Your books delve into the subjects of responses to terrorist threats and the increasing use of the military as a counter-terrorism strategy, what is your advice to governments which seek to respond to such threats with a sledge hammer?
A: My advice is simple: don’t to respond to acts of terrorism in this way, for a number of reasons. First, governments should always try and adopt policies based on a solid evidential foundation. The fact is that at present there is no solid evidence that employing massive counter-violence against terrorists actually works to reduce or end terrorism. It certainly hasn’t worked in the war on terrorism launched after 9/11. The current state of evidence actually points in the other direction: dialogue and negotiation have a much higher chance of reducing and even ending the violence.
Second, the risks of using a violent sledge hammer outweigh the potential benefits, because counter-violence risks creating new grievances, especially when innocent people fall victim. In effect, it risks escalating the conflict. It also risks undermining the legitimacy of the government and creating sympathy for the insurgents, especially if human rights are abused. There are three key principles which should guide counterterrorism policy: proportionality, legitimacy and effectiveness. That is, governments should respond in a manner which is proportional to the threat; don’t go overboard and enact disproportionate measures which inconvenience and oppress large numbers of people.
Maintain high moral standards and human rights protections; never resort to the same methods and approaches of the terrorists, but make upholding human rights the central value of the counterterrorism efforts. Finally, only enact measures that have been proven to work, or which have some basis in evidence; don’t waste resources on measures which are largely pointless or symbolic. At this moment in the global war on terror, adhering to these three principles would go a long way towards making the world a more peaceful, just and terror-free place.