DRI chair TJ McIntyre warned that Irish law in the area of accessing communication data is quickly becoming a "crucial one" given the presence here of top internet giants, such as Google, Microsoft and Twitter. He said courts and governments in the US and the UK were exploring whether their laws could reach into Ireland and force these companies to disclose personal data. And he said that a pending High Court case taken by DRI is likely to strike down Ireland's laws on data retention. "We have almost nothing in comparative terms [regarding oversight] to what they have in Britain," said Mr McIntyre, a law lecturer in University College Dublin.
Statistics are shown for this demographic
Constituency
Civil Parish
Townland
Barony
Electoral Division
Response rates from 1.8k Workers’ Party voters.
17% Yes |
83% No |
5% Yes |
80% No |
7% Yes, but only by court order |
3% No, and enact legislation preventing government surveillance of citizen communications |
3% Yes, but only for those with criminal backgrounds |
|
2% Yes, this is necessary to combat terrorism |
Trend of support over time for each answer from 1.8k Workers’ Party voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Trend of how important this issue is for 1.8k Workers’ Party voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Unique answers from Workers’ Party voters whose views went beyond the provided options.
@9ZHHRQC1wk1W
Yes, the option should be available in order to combat terrorism, but this should be done with independent oversight, and a warrant from a judge should be required in order to monitor a given individual from the public.
@9ZGZHSM1wk1W
Yes, but only in extreme circumstances and must be approved by a judge and must be done so against a person suspected of a serious crime
@9HM7ZJW11mos11MO
They should not monitor phone call or emails. However, if a person has history of criminal activities and terrorism. They have lost their rights to privacy therefore, it should be monitored
@8RLNYM84yrs4Y
No, because even if that could be useful in certain circumstances, it is too great of a risk if it falls into the wrong hands
@8PCGVVK4yrs4Y
Yes but ONLY for those who may be involved in terrorism or crime. If no evidence can be found after a period of a month or two then all surveillance must be stopped at once.
@8C5RDBV4yrs4Y
No, unless they have a court order and limited to individual persons suspected of a crime.
@8C5RDBV4yrs4Y
Yes, but only by court order and limited to individual persons suspected of a crime.
@beauchurley3yrs3Y
Yes, to counteract subterfuge by foreign by US Jewish interests and Israel (and possibly others less powerful/capable of subterfuge).
Join in on the most popular conversations.
