To Be Identified or Not

Circulating in various email groups today is a joke about a man who, ordering pizza by phone, is refused the flavor he wanted because his ID, which the pizza man demanded, showed he has high blood pressure and cholesterol. He was also advised to pay cash since his ID number also showed he has overdrawn his credit card. When the customer cursed in exasperation, the man advised him to keep his cool since his ID number said he already has a police record. Although the story brings out smiles, it also underlines the public’s anxiety over the National Identification System which the government is raring to implement.

BY RONALD B. ESCANLAR and AILEEN T. ESTOQUIA
Bulatlat

Part 3: State terrorism?

A Social Weather Station (http://www.sws.org.ph) study released on April 11 reveals that 60 percent of Filipinos surveyed believe that a national ID can help fight terrorism, while 45 percent trust that the government will not violate their right to privacy.

The same study says that support for the national ID as a tool versus terrorism is high across socio-economic classes.

However, according to Privacy International (http://www.privacy.org), simple ID cards amplify the authority of the police.

A Privacy International survey of ID cards found claims of police abuse in all countries surveyed. Most cases involved the arbitrary detention of people who fail to present an ID card.

Their survey even found cases of virtual discrimination based on the data supplied by the ID cards.

“While it is true that cards containing non-sensitive data are less likely to be used against the individual, cards are often alleged to be the vehicle for discriminatory practices,” says the group in their website.

The group further explains that police authorities who have the power to demand IDs usually have corresponding powers to detain people who fail to prove their identity. The group cited Germany, a highly industrialized country, where police can legally detain people for up to 24 hours.

“The question of who is targeted for ID checks is left largely to the discretion of police,” Privacy International concludes.

‘Sugarcoated’ guarantees against state intrusion

In an interview with a local cable news program, Bayan Muna (People First) party-list Rep. Satur Ocampo said in terms of protecting the constitutional right to privacy, EO 420 is “sugarcoated with some supposedly protective provisions.”

The EO states six safeguards against invasion of privacy – that the data to be stored shall be limited to the 14 items specified in the order; that collection or compilation of other data shall be neither be allowed nor tolerated; that stringent access control systems shall be employed; that data collected and stored shall be kept and treated as strictly confidential, requiring personal and written authorization of the owner for data access and disclosure; that issued ID cards shall have advanced security features and cryptographic technology; and that a written request of the owner shall be required for data correction and revision.

However, Rep. Ocampo said what was worrisome was the centralization of data, and what the government could do with the huge amount of data.

During the same broadcast, Parañaque City Rep. Roilo Golez downplayed Ocampo’s worries, saying that the only worrisome set of data in the national ID was the date of birth and marital status.

Golez, who chairs the House Committee on National Defense, was a former national security adviser.

If you had nothing to hide, asked Golez, why fear?

Nothing to hide, nothing to fear, nothing illegal

Executive Secretary Ermita and Interior Secretary Angelo Reyes, both former generals, carry the same line in defense of the national ID – if one has nothing to hide, one has nothing to fear.

“No one can search for bank records without securing a court order. The point is, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear,” Interior Secretary Reyes said during a recent dialogue with mediamen in Cagayan de Oro City.

Justice Secretary Raul Gonzales, in a recent speech before a provincial chapter of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP), said “If there's nothing to conceal, why would we not like this national ID system?”

Budget Secretary Emilia Boncodin said there was nothing illegal in pursuing a “harmonized multi-purpose ID,” explaining that the ID would contain the same data in existing IDs issued by government agencies.

Press Secretary Ignacio Bunye, meanwhile, told critics of the national ID to go to the courts.

At the Senate, Senate President Franklin Drilon virtually “legalized” EO 420. In a statement, Sen. Drilon said, “There will be no need for a law to establish a new national identification system if only the various government offices can integrate all existing personal data and ID cards issued to Filipino citizens.”

Both the Mayors’ League of the Philippines and the Governors’ League of the Philippines have expressed support for a national ID system.

Fearful prediction

In a statement, AnakPawis party-list Representative Crispin Beltran predicted that President Arroyo would also release an executive order legalizing the anti-terrorism law.

Rep. Beltran explained that the President and her advisers, together with anti-terror experts from the US government, have created a plan to hurdle legislative and judicial blocks to anti-terrorism measures.

"This plan entails Pres. Arroyo's release of a series of executive orders that will directly bypass congressional authority. Already, the EO on the national ID system has been released. On its heels will come an EO on anti-terrorism, and this EO will legitimize and legalize the prosecution and even perhaps neutralization of the government's political targets,” Rep. Beltran said. Bulatlat