Righteous Espionage

Trust, But Thoroughly Verify

It's looking as though the NZ government will get its amendments to spying legislation through the Parliament and into law.  There is continued opposition to the bill, despite substantial changes and amendments being made.  This continued opposition has begged a question: what changes to the bill would satisfy the remaining opponents?  The answer seems to be: nix spying completely.  In this view, espionage is wrong, period. 

This totaliter aliter opposition has two forms: a semi-strong form, and a strong form.  The semi-strong form makes a divide between spying on citizens and spying on non-citizens.  Spying on citizens is always wrong--in this view.  The strong form opposition has it that all spying period, regardless of the object, is wrong.  Neither the semi-strong or strong forms of opposition make much sense. 

In reality we have domestic spying going on all the time.  All forms of police surveillance constitute a form of spying.  Some require a judicial warrant.  Some don't.
  When a police car goes down a street and observes an unruly crowd and the car parks up and watches what transpires, it is a form of spying--on citizens, no less.  Likewise, all undercover policing is a form of espionage.

It is axiomatic that even as we have criminals and would-be criminals in our midst, so we have those beyond our borders who would render harm to our people.  Knowing who they are and what they are likely to be up to, in order to protect and defend is essential.  It is an intrinsic and ethical duty of civil government.   This renders espionage an essential duty of state policing. 

The issue is not espionage per se, but the terms and conditions under which it takes place.  New Zealand's tacit constitution has a separation of powers: parliament versus the executive; judiciary versus the executive,  the people versus the government, and so forth.  The appropriate controls over spying need to be set in law and they need to draw upon separate powers to provide sufficient checks, balances, and protections.  If that is the case, then we have no principial objections to espionage.   But, pre-meditated, planned espionage activities ought to have judicial oversight and warrant--to confirm that the activity is lawful.  Not capturing and storing unwarranted information upon citizens is an essential limitation, and so forth.  Judicial reviews of the overall spying "programme" are also necessary and a useful check and balance.  Reporting to a parliamentary committee according to the terms set forth by parliament is also a helpful check.  Sunlight is always the best disinfectant.   The bottom line is that no one governing power should implicitly trust the others.  All men are evil, and if left to their own devices, the evil of men will eventually predominate.

"Never trust the bastards" is a good maxim in these matters.  If men are allowed to arrogate power in secret they will do it.  Those that profess they won't definitely should not be trusted.  Truly honourable men will insist upon limitations and checks and balances to, and scrutiny of, their powers.  

We need to be reminded that prior to our current Prime Minister, we were served by one Helen Clark.  Clark's Jacobinish regimen was characterised by a general disregard for our tacit constitution and an ambition to make radical changes to the way our democracy is constituted for partisan political motives--as in trying (and failing) to ram through taxpayer funding of political parties. (Her own party, NZ Labour had run out of money due to declining membership.)  She was also alleged to have leaked privileged information to news media anonymously in order to get people she opposed dismissed.  It does not bear imagining what Clark would have done with an intelligence service empowered to spy on any or all New Zealanders without checks and balances.  The current Prime Minister appears naive and unaware of the risks.  He is a cheery, "hail, well met" kind of fellow.  Neither Clark nor Key--nor any other Prime Minister deserves our trust in such matters.  It has to be a "trust but thoroughly verify" regime if our liberties are to be properly protected.

It is disappointing that our current opposition political parties (NZ Labour, Greens) have failed to play a responsible role in the present spying legislation changes.  They could have had a very constructive role on behalf of us all, but they chose not to, intent on scoring partisan political points.  This amounts to a gross dereliction of duty and responsibility.  As it has turned out, we have had to rely on the contribution of one sole independent MP--Peter Dunne who negotiated some crucial amendments to the legislation.  Labour, the Greens and other blow-hearts such as Winston Peters have failed in their responsibilities and are beneath contempt in this matter.

Christians believe in original sin.  We believe in total depravity.  We believe in government instituted by, and responsible to God.  Therefore, we respect government, whilst being deeply sceptical of those who hold office. Power does actually corrupt.  It energises the latent corruption present in us all.  "Respect our government, but distrust our governors" is a thoroughly Christian maxim--all the more so, when secrecy and espionage are on the table.