Create a 10 page essay paper that discusses Coursework about Computers and the Law CW2.In his spare time, Jasper has also been hosting a web site from the Bank’s server which advocates violence and.
Create a 10 page essay paper that discusses Coursework about Computers and the Law CW2.
In his spare time, Jasper has also been hosting a web site from the Bank’s server which advocates violence and the political over throw of elected government in the UK. The Government Security services discover Jasper’s web site and want to spy on Jasper’s activities while he is hosting it, believing it will supply them with useful intelligence.
One of the main issues that are raised in the above scenario is the issue of privacy. In order to be able to determine the legitimacy of the employers’ interception of Jasper’s emails it is necessary to consider the Human Rights Act 1998 and Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights 1950. It is also necessary to examine the rights of the government to be able to order the interception of emails. In this particular case justification could be based on issues of national security since Jasper is a hosting a website which advocates overthrowing the elected government and advocates violence. This will involve an examination of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. This will also require an examination of the Data Protection Act 1998.
In examining the rights of the employer to intercept email the issue of personal freedom is challenged. Craig (1999)1 was concerned that allowing employers to conduct electronic surveillance of employees through intercepting their emails could allow them access to private information about the employee, even if this was not the intended purpose of the monitoring. The case of Copland v United Kingdom 2 demonstrates this issue nicely. In this case the complainant alleged that Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 had been violated by her employers monitoring of her email and internet usage as well as her telephone calls. The respondent argued that respect for her private life had not been