| Sažetak | Osnovni cilj ove disertacije bio je utvrditi je li zbog rapidnog razvoja tehnologije i novih sigurnosnih izazova došlo do transformacije pojma privatnosti, odnosno prava na privatnost u političkom smislu. Najprije je privatnost definirana kao mogućnost kontrole pristupa (podacima o) sebi. Definicijom privatnosti u terminima kontrole pojedinca se stavlja u središte njegova postojanja te se naglašava vrijednost privatnosti za autonomiju i uspostavu bliskih međuljudskih odnosa. Ugroze privatnosti su prema stupnju kontrole koju pojedinac nad njima ima ugrubo podijeljene na interne i eksterne ugroze privatnosti, odnosno na one ugroze u kojima kontrolu nad (podacima o) nama nekome dobrovoljno predajemo ili nam je netko oduzima bez našega znanja. Na primjeru masovnog nekritičkog nadzora koji provode pojedine strane obavještajne službe prikazane su opasnosti koje proizlaze iz eksternih ugroza privatnosti, dok je za eksterne korišten odnos najvećih svjetskih informacijskih tvrtki prema korisničkim podacima, a posebice činjenica kako ljudi olako prepuštaju svoje osobne podatke u zamjenu za digitalne usluge ili trgovačke pogodnosti. Kroz normativnu raspravu o intrinzičnoj i instrumentalnoj vrijednosti privatnosti obrazloženo je kako je privatnost temeljno ljudsko pravo koje istovremeno ima svoj značaj za pojedinca, društvo, političku zajednicu i demokraciju. Na taj način definirana privatnost suočena je s opsegom i razinom eksternih i internih ugroza privatnosti te je zaključeno kako je pojam privatnosti radikalno transformiran iz temeljnog ljudskog prava u robu kojom se trguje.
U drugom dijelu rada, provedeno je empirijsko istraživanje čiji je cilj bio utvrditi način na koji ljudi razumiju koncept privatnosti. Istraživanje se sastojalo od kvalitativnog predistraživanja korištenjem metode polustrukturiranog intervjua provedenog na 16 sudionika te kvantitativnog anketnog istraživanja provedenog na uzorku od 966 sudionika.Rezultati istraživanja pokazuju kako većina ljudi deklarativno visoko vrednuje važnost privatnosti. No, istovremeno su tek umjereno zabrinuti za privatnost te, ono značajnije, tek rijetko iskazuju ponašanja kojima štite vlastitu privatnost. Prema tome, zaključeno je kako je trenutni odnos pojedinaca prema vlastitoj privatnosti te odnos država prema privatnosti svojih građana nespojiv s temeljnim postavkama liberalne demokracije. Budući da se temeljno ljudsko pravo na privatnost unutar liberalno-demokratske paradigme ne može normativno redefinirati, potrebno je bez odgode početi na odgovarajući način osiguravati, štititi i vrednovati pravo na privatnost svakog čovjeka. |
| Sažetak (engleski) | The main purpose of this dissertation was to determine whether the concept of privacy was transformed as a result of the rapid technological development and emerging security challenges in the last fifteen years. The thesis is based on two levels of analysis. At the level of a nation-state a thorough normative discussion was conducted and at the level of citizens an empirical research was conducted. At first, privacy was defined as the ability to control access to (information about) oneself. The definition of privacy in terms of control places the individual at the centre of her existence and emphasizes the value of privacy for autonomy and the establishment of close interpersonal relationships.
After defining the concept of privacy and determining its value, next task was to observe current threats to privacy. Threats to privacy were divided into two broad groups based on the degree of control that an individual has over them. Depending on the locus of control of (information about) us the, there were two groups of threats – external and internal. External being those in which control over (information about) us was seized without our knowledge and/or against our will, whereas internal being those in which control over (information about) us was voluntarily given. As an example of dangers arising from external threats to privacy mass-surveillance carried out by certain large intelligence services was used. On the other hand, to illustrate the dangers arising from internal threats, the relationship between the world's largest digital and advertising companies and user data was used, and in particular the fact that people are reluctantly giving their personal information in exchange for digital services or virtually irrelevant convenience.
Through a normative discussion on the intrinsic and instrumental value of privacy, privacy was carefully established as a fundamental human right, which at the same time has its significance for the individual, society, the political community and democracy.Privacy defined in this was faced with the extent and the level of external and internal threats to privacy we encounter today. It was concluded that the concept of privacy is radically transformed from basic human rights to a tradable commodity.
In the second part of the thesis, an empirical study was conducted in order to get insights on the way people today view privacy. Research has collected some very valuable information on how people understand privacy and threats to privacy. In the qualitative pre-study 16 people were interviewed using a semi-structured interview method. Results have shown that people are very
rarely thinking about privacy, but when they do, most of them find it very important and they value it. Findings from this study have been used it the following quantitative study that has been carried out on a much larger sample of 966 participants. Primary goal was to test the privacy paradox, which describes a phenomenon of disparity between the high importance of privacy and the ease with which they are willing to give it up. The results have confirmed the existence of a privacy paradox, that is, those participants who appreciated their privacy the most showed that they behave statistically isignificantly different from what could be expected of those who value their privacy highly.
Furthermore, in both qualitative and quantitative study, we’ve collected a number of empirical data that contributes to better understanding of how individuals perceive privacy. These findings are complementary to the conclusion of the normative discussion on the radical transformation of the concept of privacy. Research results show that most people still highly value the importance of privacy. But at the same time, they are only moderately concerned about privacy and, more importantly, they rarely express privacy protecting behaviour. Therefore, it was concluded that the current relationship of individuals towards their own privacy as well as the way modern states respect privacy of their citizens is incompatible with the fundamental settings of liberal democracy. Since it is not possible to normatively redefine the fundamental human right to privacy within the liberal democratic paradigm, it is necessary to begin adequately securing, protecting the right of every person's privacy.
However, due to the widespread voluntary waiving of their privacy in order to gain access to various services and benefits, states should be determined to securing the privacy rights of their citizens despite the wish of its citizens to renounce it. Although such paternalism may, to a certain extent, be justified within the liberal paradigm, it is unrealistic for it to happen. More so because the states themselves are motivated to stay aside in this matter because due to reduced sensitivity to internal threats at the same time citizens have become less sensitive to external threats to privacy. Today's consumer wants a free service, benefits and discounts, precise recommendations, tailored advertisements, and believes that sharing of personal information is a low price for that.
This thesis should be seen as an attempt of contributing to this hot topic, having in mind that is just a small part of the extensive debate on the role and importance of privacy to follow. Despite the fact that this work represents a certain contribution to the restoration of privacy to its
deserved normative framework, the results of the empirical research give little room to maintain optimism. |
