Политические риски цифрового наблюдения в условиях COVID-19: кейсы России, США и Южной Кореи

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a forced digitalization of information technology and changed the methods and forms of government surveillance, which is a source of risks and dangers. The more COVID-19 spreads and the number of deaths from the virus grows, the more governments are introducing information technology into their policies to combat COVID-19. Of course, this can be seen as a positive thing if it really helps to reduce the rate of morbidity and mortality. But in the context of the rapid growth of technologies, society must pay attention to what measures are being taken “for its benefit”, what technologies are being developed and implemented, what functions they perform and what will happen to them after the pandemic ends.
It is also necessary to think about clarifying these technologies in order to understand who will benefit and who will suffer. This study will examine the potential and risks of such technologies, as well as how these technologies will be used to repress and oppress populations.
Several international organizations (Privacy International, Project Plowshares) have noticed the proliferation of digital tracking technologies during the COVID-19 pandemic. A large number of countries (China, Ecuador, Germany, India, Israel, Italy, Poland, South Korea, Taiwan, and Thailand) use GPS on mobile phones to track people in quarantine and infected people in contact with another.
Israel uses historical data to track the movement of people in recent weeks. South Korea has combined mobile phone monitoring data with CCTV recordings and credit card purchases to track the routes of infected people. In Hong Kong, bracelets are issued to all arrivals to ensure compliance with mandatory quarantine. Several countries are working with commercial companies to develop new technologies (TraceTogether in Singapoore, Home Quarantine in Poland). Some governments use drones to spray disinfectants in public places and to transport medical equipment to quarantine areas. Saudi Arabia has already deployed drones to measure people’s body
5
temperature. 1 However, this research will focus only on one type of surveillance –
digital tracing.
Questions concerning these technologies has sparked many questions: How much online surveillance is ethical? When is privacy more important than public safety and health? Who has the right to use personal data of others, and for what reasons?
While answers to these questions are complex and subjective, one thing is clear; the choices policymakers make in times of crisis will shape the future and will likely remain in force post-COVID-19. Navigating issues of surveillance during the crisis requires realising and recognising three critical things.
Altogether, many countries have been developing or using digital tracing to combat COVID-19, therefore, it is destined to be an extremely important topic for discussion in the coming months and years (Attachment A).
There are a lot of research works concerning theoretical aspects of government surveillance.
L.V. Smorgunov prove that types of control and surveillance are manifested in all
modern high-tech societies, regardless of democratic or authoritarian regimes. Democratic
regimes cannot resist the expansion of techno-social assemblies of control because of security
and efficiency needs. Authoritarian regimes legitimize their intentions of dominance with the
same technocratic argument for security and efficiency provided by the new industrial
2 revolution.
Based on the work “Engaging Privacy and Information Technology in a Digital Age” by National Research Council, it is possible to trace the evolution of government surveillance from the early 19th century to the present day.
It is impossible also to not mention theoretical works of Torin Monahan («Surveillance in the Time of Insecurity», «Surveillance and Security: Technological Politics and Power in Everyday Life»), David Lyon («Theorizing Surveillance: The Panopticon and Beyond», Surveillance Studies: An Overview) and Sarah Brayane («Predict and Surveil: Data,
1 Acheson R. COVID-19: The Risks of Relying on Technology to “Save Us” from the Coronavirus // Women’s International League For Peace&Freedom. 2020. URL: https://www.wilpf.org/covid-19-the-risks-of-relying-on- technology-to-save-us-from-the-coronavirus/. (03.03.2021).
2 Smorgunov L.V. Institutionalization of Governability and the Problem of Veillance in the Space of Digital Communications // South-Russian Journal of Social Sciences. 2019. Vol. 20. Issue 3. 63 pp.

6
Discretion, and the Future of Policing») which all contribute in theoretical investigation of such
concept as «state surveillance».
There are also researches concerning current situation with digital surveillance.
One of the first meaningful scientific work in this field – article of Yuval Noah Harari – the author of the popular science bestsellers «Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind». His article «The world after coronavirus» published in Financial Times journal aware that many short-term emergency measures implemented during pandemic will become a fixture of life. The main idea of article is that even when the number of cases of coronavirus infections has dropped to zero, some governments that need data argue to maintain a biometric surveillance system, because they are afraid the second wave of coronavirus, or because a new Ebola virus is spreading in Central Africa. «A big battle has been raging in recent years over our privacy. The coronavirus crisis could be the battle’s tipping point. For when people are given a choice between privacy and health, they will usually choose health»3. The author conclude: «If we choose disunity, this will not only prolong the crisis, but will probably result in even worse catastrophes in the future. If we choose global solidarity, it will be a victory not only against the coronavirus, but against all future epidemics and crises that might assail humankind in the 21st century».4
Ray Acheson in her article «COVID-19: The Risks of Relying on Technology to “Save Us” from the Coronavirus» touches upon such important topics use of informational technologies, and justifications for them, in the context of militarism and political economy in order to fully understand who will benefit and who will suffer. There is also consideration of the potential for weaponisation of some of this technology, or how it can be used to repress and oppress populations. Also the author writes about what actions we can take now to prevent the dystopian future that otherwise awaits us.5
3 Harari Y. N. The world after coronavirus // Financial Times. URL: https://www.ft.com/content/19d90308-6858-11ea- a3c9-1fe6fedcca75. (11.02.2021).
4 URL: https://www.ft.com/content/19d90308-6858-11ea-a3c9-1fe6fedcca75
5 URL: https://www.wilpf.org/covid-19-the-risks-of-relying-on-technology-to-save-us-from-the-coronavirus/.

7
But there is a lack of research which focuses on different approaches to
implementing such policies and identifies the risks and potential of each approach. So, the goal of this research is to specify the potential and risks of digital surveillance implementation as a part of government’s policy during COVID-
pandemic.
This goal is achieved by solving a number of interrelated tasks:
1. Review of scientific approaches to government surveillance definition.
2. Determination of the main stages of state surveillance systems’ development
in the context of digital state evolution.
3. Review of modern digital state surveillance methods, as well as the risks they
accumulate.
4. Research of tracing as one of the most efficient type of state surveillance,
determination of it’s specifics.
5. An overview of the technical capabilities of tracing, as well as the strategies
of it’s implementation.
6. Development of unique methodology of comparative analysis of public policy
in terms of the introduction of tracing systems on the example of 3 countries (justification of the choice of countries and the development of criteria for analysis and comparison).
7. Comparison of the obtained results of conducted policy analysis, the division of tracing systems’ implementation policies into three types.
8. Research of the advantages and risks of each policy type.
9. Formulation of recommendations for government authorities in the field of efficient digital surveillance systems’ implementation to manage coronavirus.
Object of research – strategies of digital surveillance systems’ implementation in the context of COVID-19.
Subject of research – determination of the potential and risk assessment of the introduced systems (on the example of tracing tools).
Research design. The methodology of this research is a combination of 2 approaches – policy analysis and comparative analysis in case-study frame.

8
The policy analysis approach was chosen for analysis of existing government
policies, it aims to explain their development. The areas of research are policies of three countries that implemented digital surveillance during the COVID-19 pandemic. This research puts focus onto political processes and the stakeholders involved. The aim is to determine what processes, means and policy instruments (e.g., regulation, legislation, sanctions) are used. Countries for policy analysis will be categorized into three types based on their reaction speed on pandemic. A fast time value indicated that the infections were quickly suppressed in a country; hence, it would be categorized under ‘fast reaction’. Therefore, for the Pandemic indicator, this research categorized the countries into three groups: fast, medium, slow (Table 1).
Comparative analysis here is for comparative research where contextual interrogation precedes any analysis of similarity and difference. It will help determine which logical conclusions a data set resulting from policy analysis supports. The analysis will provide list of variables observed in policy analysis, followed by applying the rules of logical inference to determine which descriptive inferences or implications the data supports.
The results will be grouped into three categories based on the data that will be identified in the analysis, highlighting three types of policy. The focus of the definition will be laid on determining the main resource of a policy.
The combination of these approaches is carried out in the context of a case study, that involves an up-close, in-depth, and detailed examination of a particular case or cases, within a real-world context. The research design is described in more detail at the beginning of paragraph 2.2.