Ruben Melikyan raises several concerns on the government-authored draft law, authorizing general surveillance over the location, calls and messages31.03.2020
Ruben Melikyan raises several concerns on the government-authored draft law, authorizing general surveillance over the location, the content of calls and messages.
1) We are required by law to download a certain application on our mobile phones, the aim of which is to control our conducts and state of health. In fact, refusal to download the application will result in a fine, ranging from 100.000 AMD to 250.000 AMD. There is no guarantee that this requirement will only apply to a certain target group – it is the Government and the commandant, assigned at the time of emergence, that decide. There is no requirement for a justification of the decision. There is no possibility to appeal the decision.
2) Our telecommunication operators are required by law to transfer information to the executive body on the time and duration of our phone calls and messages. This is, as explained, to find out about our network of contacts, in case it is proven that we are infected. Yet, for the achievement of the announced goal, the suitability of this tool cannot be logically justified since i) having telephone conversations with a certain group of people does not necessarily mean that we have also been in physical contact with them ii) likewise, being in physical contact with a certain group of people does not necessarily mean that we have also had telephone conversations with them. Even if we take into consideration the presumption of conscience of the authors of the draft law, which is highly unlikely, still, it would be logical to gather information that would concern only the infected and not all citizens.
3) The huge repository mentioned in the 2nd clause is to be, for some unknown reason, “unpersonalized” and saved for an unlimited period of time.
Out of these 3 clauses, which are unacceptable a hundred percent, the Government has made the decision to renounce the 3rd clause, by keeping the 1st and 2nd clauses.
Hence, instead of having a disgrace of 300%, we end up with a disgrace of 200%. Is there progress? Yes. Are we satisfied? Absolutely not!