top of page

Surveillance State: The Cost of Security at the Expense of Liberty

In an era where the notion of a surveillance state has transitioned from dystopian fiction to a palpable reality, the debate on the cost of security at the expense of liberty has never been more pertinent. This discourse critically examines how increased surveillance by governments infringes upon individual privacy and freedom.

The principle of a just society, one that balances security with liberty, assumes that while government surveillance may be a tool for ensuring safety (the evidence does not validate this notion), it must not infringe upon the fundamental rights of individuals. This delicate balance is crucial to preserving the essence of a free society. In the context of the Northern Territory, Australia, this balance is particularly challenging due to the unique security concerns and the diverse demographic composition of the region. The NT has greater surveillance camera's per person than most major cities on the planet.

From an economic standpoint, the argument for surveillance often hinges on the perceived benefits of security and order, which are essential for economic stability and growth. However, as any economist would argue, there is a cost to this security, paid not just in dollars but in the currency of individual freedoms and societal trust. The Northern Territory, with its significant investments in security infrastructure, presents a case study in assessing these costs and benefits.

The psychological impact of living under constant surveillance cannot be understated. The sense of being perpetually monitored breeds a culture of fear and conformity, stifling individualism and creativity. This, in turn, affects societal wellbeing, as individuals become more concerned with avoiding surveillance than with engaging in free and spontaneous activities. The effect is particularly pronounced in communities with a history of distrust towards authorities, as is the case in certain parts of the Northern Territory. In human interactions, a fundamental truth emerges: when individuals feel the weight of oppression, their instinctive response is to resist. This is particularly evident in the context of governmental overreach. When authorities attempt to assert dominance through coercive means, it invariably leads to a counter-reaction from those upon whom the force is exerted. This dynamic, a testament to the inherent desire for autonomy and self-determination, plays out time and again in the theater of political power struggles.

Philosophies that place a strong emphasis on individual rights serve as the foundation for the legal framework surrounding surveillance. In the Northern Territory, the implementation of surveillance technologies has raised questions about the right to privacy and the potential for abuse of power by authorities. In submissions in court at the start of 2023 the NT Police intelligence was forced to admit that they constantly surveilled the communications devices of police personnel, and explained it was an employment contractual obligation. The judiciary did not push back on what was a blatant violation of the Privacy Act and a breach of federal contract law, an act the public can only discern as deference or conformity on the matter. The legal debate is centered around finding a balance that safeguards citizens from both external threats and the overreach of their own government. It is evident that government overreach and abuse are the norm, not the exception.

From the viewpoint of criminal justice, surveillance is a double-edged sword. While it aids in deterring and solving crimes, it also risks turning society into a panopticon, where everyone is treated as a potential criminal. This approach has significant implications for social trust and cohesion, particularly in multicultural societies like the Northern Territory, where the perception of surveillance varies greatly across different communities.

As a security trainer with almost three decades of experience, I emphasise the need for a pragmatic approach to surveillance, one that recognises its utility in protecting citizens while being acutely aware of its limitations and potential for misuse. In the Northern Territory, this means tailoring surveillance strategies to the specific needs and contexts of different communities, ensuring that they serve the public good without infringing on individual freedoms. The private use of surveillance systems does not share these same flaws as the use or compliance with surveillance is a voluntary choice made by the individual, who may chose to trade elsewhere.

The debate on the surveillance state in the Northern Territory, as in the rest of the world, is not about choosing between absolute security and complete liberty. It is about finding a middle ground where the benefits of surveillance in terms of security and order are balanced against the cost it exacts on individual privacy and freedom.

This requires a nuanced understanding of the economic, psychological, legal, and practical implications of surveillance. The ultimate goal should be to create a society that is both safe and free, where surveillance is used judiciously and with respect for the fundamental rights of every individual.

The repeated transgressions against public trust by those in power, extending even to the treatment of their law enforcement personnel, present a strong case for the confinement of surveillance technology to the private sector. In private hands, there exists a tangible mechanism for accountability, a stark contrast to the elusive nature of bringing governmental entities to account for their frequent oversteps. This distinction underscores the challenge of policing those who wield the instruments of power, highlighting the complexity of ensuring the responsible use of surveillance capabilities. From the author.

The opinions and statements are those of Sam Wilks and do not necessarily represent whom Sam Consults or contracts to. Sam Wilks is a skilled and experienced Security Consultant with almost 3 decades of expertise in the fields of Real estate, Security, and the hospitality/gaming industry. His knowledge and practical experience have made him a valuable asset to many organizations looking to enhance their security measures and provide a safe and secure environment for their clients and staff.

2 views0 comments


bottom of page