Spying via Pegasus a Cyber Crime?
4 Min Read
Despite the fact that the right to privacy is protected by the UN Charter and by constitutions of "democratic" governments, Western businesses have repeatedly violated it in recent years, with the knowledge of their governments.
-
Privacy protectors hack privacy… who holds them accountable?
Privacy is a basic human right that is guaranteed by the UN Charter and treaties, as well as its Human Rights Council.
Given that electronic devices, such as smartphones, have become increasingly attached to people throughout the day as they go about their various jobs, hacking and piracy have become the primary means of invading their privacy to cause physical or moral harm, whether direct or indirect. This has become legally known as "cybercrime."
While the right to privacy is not directly addressed in the constitutions of certain countries, it is plainly and explicitly protected in the constitutions of others. The majority of governments, however, do not respect this right of their nationals, and if they do, they do not apply it to nationals of other countries.
The "state of emergency threatening the existence of the nation," which governments use as a pretext when their espionage cases are exposed, is the one instance in which the violation of the right to privacy is considered legal.
Edward Snowden, a former CIA technical contractor and operative, exposed the extent of government intrusion into individual privacy in 2013, notably by the United States, which has always considered itself the ultimate protector of the rights and freedoms of individuals and peoples.
Under a secret court order forcing Verizon Telephone to keep the National Security Agency "updated daily of all telephone conversations made via the firm." Thanks to Snowden, the world has become aware of the scope of the US government intrusion into people's privacy.
Also thanks to Snowden, we got to learn about the Prism program, the confidential National Security Agency program that gives direct access to Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, YouTube, Skype, Apple, and other companies. For more efficient espionage, the Agency has demonstrated that it can link all the information it receives from all of these sources through its Boundless Informant project.
Following the Pegasus scandal, Snowden, a Russian resident, urged that the NSO group be prosecuted, stating that NSO "must bear direct criminal responsibility for the death and detention of individuals whose personal data were hacked by the program." He also called for "a total ban on the selling of tracing programs."
Julian Assange, the Founder of WikiLeaks, did the same thing before Edward Snowden, but in the opposite direction. Through hacking websites of international organizations, governmental organizations, and various institutions around the world, he exposed confidential information and their working mechanisms, which include piracy and censorship. He also disclosed the behind-the-scenes processes of international politics and how policies are made in the decision-making circles worldwide.
So what was said yesterday regarding NSO eavesdropping isn't new, especially that we have read in previous years about the ability of this company's Pegasus program to access chat programs and social media and review their content.
Similar to the United States, the Israeli company’s behavior is similar to that of the occupying government. "Interior Minister Ayelet Shaked is a very close friend of the chairman of NSO," Israeli media reported on Monday, raising valid concerns about who is behind this organization and its goals, especially that we are talking about “a government that hacked an entire land and displaced its people.”
The case of Assange raises the question of whether people charged with piracy will face the same level of prosecution and governmental treatment. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, as well as their Crown Princes Mohammed bin Salman and Mohammed bin Zayed respectively, are among those who have used the Pegasus program. The purposes of this program are well-known, and in this particular case, it was used to spy on officials and journalists in other countries, such as Lebanese President Michel Aoun, Former Prime Minister Saad Hariri, Governor of Banque du Liban, Riad Salameh, and other officials, as well as journalists Ghassan Ben Jeddou and Ibrahim Al Amine, in addition to opposition figures at home and abroad.
What are the goals and objectives of the Saudi and Emirati espionage? In the event that the targeted individuals were subjected to any harm, be it physical or moral, as in the case of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi and Mexican journalist Cecilio Pineda Brito, who were both spied on by NSO and then killed; shouldn't the program users bear the responsibility for their safety? Will they be held accountable for this "cybercrime"?
