The discussion of “citizenship rights” has had many ups and downs throughout history, starting with political rights in ancient Greece and later evolving into cultural, social, and civil rights. Recently, with the expansion of digital technologies and virtual space, the topic of citizenship rights in the digital and virtual realm has gained attention.

For years, users and activists in the field of privacy have been concerned about the use of their data for espionage purposes by governments. There are still many questions about the extent of “authorized surveillance” from a legal perspective. It remains to be seen what impact the implementation of these laws and regulations will have on users and, of course, their privacy. To answer these questions and further examine the topic, we sat down for a conversation with Dr. Ehsan Shahghasemi, a member of the faculty of the Communications Department at the University of Tehran.

What is the scope and territory of privacy in the virtual space? Generally, what entity or institution can be responsible for defending citizens’ rights in the virtual space?

Privacy is one of the aspects of citizenship rights and is considered a sanctuary for humans. It is a place where no one has the right to enter without permission. Nowadays, privacy encompasses concepts such as freedom of conscience and thought, control over one’s body, having solitude and privacy at home and in private places, control over personal information, freedom from the surveillance of others, protection of one’s dignity and credibility, and protection against inspections, espionage, and tracking. Privacy is a right and this fundamental right is related to preserving the status of humans and other values that bring human dignity to us. Based on this right, an individual or group can live according to their own will and taste, with minimal interference and intrusion from others.

Privacy is a limited area that an individual expects to be protected from others. This “other” can be the government, as well as other individuals and entities. Therefore, privacy in the virtual space has a similar definition. However, this space has created new threats and opportunities for privacy, and privacy in the virtual space is faced with questions, ambiguities, and challenges.

First, we need to address the root of the formation of the concept of privacy and virtual space. Privacy becomes important when an individual is important, and without the individual, their privacy does not exist. This is why privacy is a modern concept. Now, considering the fact that this individual is the most influential element in the virtual space and is the one who gives identity to the internet as a user, the concept and scope of privacy in the virtual space becomes even more important. Naturally, with the clarification of this issue, we must look for ways to violate privacy in the virtual space and address the question of who and for what purposes violate privacy in the virtual space and social networks.

Regarding responsible institutions, all organizations and institutions are responsible and one cannot be considered solely responsible. This is because the virtual space is not limited to one area and includes all cultural, social, political, economic, educational, health, and well-being areas, and all of these areas have their own responsible institutions that must protect the rights of citizens in this space. Due to the technological nature of this space, the responsibility of institutions such as the Ministry of Communications is greater, but as it is specified in the division of tasks in the National Information Network and other approved documents of the Supreme Council of the Virtual Space, each institution has responsibility in its relevant area and can protect the rights of citizens in the virtual space. However, in order to have a more accurate division of tasks in this matter, it may be necessary to prepare a higher-level document on the rights of citizens in the virtual space based on the foundations of the Constitution, and based on that, the responsibilities of each government institution, as well as

Can governments be considered the main violators of privacy in cyberspace? How effective is self-care in the virtual space?

Governments can be recognized as a major violator of privacy in the virtual space. The reason for this is hidden in events related to terrorist attacks, especially after the September 11th incident in the United States. In these events, the American government (and subsequently most governments in the world) came to the conclusion that they must prioritize security over privacy. This theory later manifested in the form of surveillance of American citizens’ phone calls, and subsequently, the surveillance of the phone calls of leaders of other countries and strict regulations regarding immigration and travel to the United States. These laws, which have been passed and remain valid to this day, are increasing in number and have also spread to most countries, becoming a model for others to follow. This pessimism and atmosphere that has been created will result in a limited view of privacy, and naturally, governments will want to justify the restriction of privacy in the virtual space by claiming to establish security and public order. The most prominent example in this regard is the

The development and facilitation of communication methods among individuals around the world has created a space for achieving various human rights and freedoms in the cyber world. At first glance, it may seem that the restrictions imposed on this space are not compatible with the principles and foundations of human rights, and that governments do not have the right to intervene in this space – which is independent and global. However, it is certain that the self-care perspective of citizens and users in the cyber space, which stems from a completely freedom-seeking approach, cannot be fully accepted; because this perspective cannot guarantee the protection of human rights, and rules and regulations must be established to protect human rights. If cyber laws and regulations do not keep up with technological advancements, it may have the most negative impact on the privacy of citizens, who are faced with more severe threats and their personal data becomes more easily accessible to everyone. This requires governments to establish laws and regulations to protect the rights of users and safeguard the privacy of citizens.

How are privacy and data security collectible? What approach do technology companies have towards the privacy of users and citizens’ rights in general?
من دوست دارم که به سفر بروم

I love to go on a trip.

In today’s world, the protection of data privacy and security are closely related. Due to advancements in technology, every day a larger volume of our information, both professional and personal, is stored digitally, and at the same time, the risks also increase. Even simple events like remote work can make us vulnerable to threats. On the other hand, companies are placing more importance on collecting data than ever before. Privacy is the right of customers that should not be overlooked.

If people feel that they have lost their privacy, they will become “limited” and their actions and behaviors will change. Digital technologies are increasingly tracking the movements of users every day, and people are deeply concerned about losing their privacy. If we feel constantly under surveillance, our behavior will change, we will have less agency, think less about issues, and modify our way of thinking. In such a world, we will limit ourselves and change society in a widespread manner.

Some digital companies allow their users to have more control over their privacy by using the “transparency tracking” feature, and as long as they do not give “direct permission” for tracking, the application is not able to track them. Although some major technology companies such as Apple agree with user control over their privacy, this is not pleasing to some other companies like Facebook. Because this is something that Facebook has always done and believes it harms small businesses.

Applications use user data to determine their preferences and based on that, introduce products to them. If an application does not have access to user data, a wave of unrelated advertisements will be sent to users. This will be both costly and time-consuming for users. However, on the other hand, the use of data is a double-edged sword that can become a major threat against citizens.

Can the constitution and current legal structure protect the rights of citizens in cyberspace?

How is it possible for a program like the seventh program titled “Development of Creation” to have content that includes examples of restricting the scope of citizenship rights?

Principles of the Constitution – as a roadmap for governance – is a set of rules and regulations that all branches of government, from top to bottom, are obligated to follow and no authority or entity has the right to act against these principles. Although this legal obligation is applicable in various dimensions and must be followed, when it comes to the rights of the nation and human privileges, it is accompanied by a stronger determination and any violation of it warrants a reaction from the government and society. One of the fundamental examples of human rights is the protection of citizens’ privacy and keeping it safe from any intrusion. Where Article 23 of the Constitution prohibits the inspection of beliefs or Article 25 prohibits inspection, recording, and disclosure of telephone conversations, telegram communications, and any form of espionage, it strongly emphasizes the need to protect individuals’ privacy, which in the mentioned article, based on the necessities of the time of the Constitution’s enactment and the examples of means of mass communication, refers to some of these

What is stated in clauses A and B of Article 75 of the Seventh Development Plan, entitled “Monitoring, Surveillance, and Continuous Measurement of Public Culture” has been established, regardless of the fact that it is a valid reason for the inefficiency of cultural programs in the past forty years and the acceptance of negative consequences and the parallel corruption in cultural affairs, is a clear violation of citizens’ privacy and is contrary to higher documents and regulations that emphasize the protection of citizens’ privacy. Privacy is defined as the territory of each individual’s life, which every person expects others not to have access to information and data about that territory without their consent. The executive regulations of the Law on Publication and Free Access to Information introduce privacy as a territory of personal life that a person expects others not to violate without their consent, prior notice, or by order of the judiciary. The circular of the head of the judiciary, entitled “Judicial Security Document,” also considers privacy as the territory of individuals’ private lives,

Thank you for the opportunity you have provided us with to use the peace line.