Who holds the balance? A missing detail in the debate over balancing security and liberty

Rahul Sagar

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    The question of how best to balance the pursuit of security with the protection of civil liberties has been heavily debated in recent years. This paper challenges the conclusions reached in that debate. It argues that although theorists have identified important subsidiary causes of imbalance, they do not address the structural dilemma posed by state secrecy, which creates an information asymmetry that allows officials to manipulate safeguards meant to secure an appropriate balance. Since this asymmetry cannot be easily resolved, imbalance remains a perennial danger that often can be addressed only retrospectively. Unfortunately, retrospection too can be stymied by the executive's control over state secrets, and it can also be undermined by partisanship, even when the relevant information becomes available. With this in mind, the paper identifies mechanisms to limit the abuse of state secrecy and indicates institutional features that may temper the adverse effects of partisanship.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)166-188
    Number of pages23
    JournalPolity
    Volume41
    Issue number2
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Apr 1 2009

    Fingerprint

    secrecy
    asymmetry
    available information
    abuse
    cause

    Keywords

    • Balance
    • Civil liberties
    • Executive
    • Security
    • State secrecy
    • Terrorism

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Sociology and Political Science

    Cite this

    Who holds the balance? A missing detail in the debate over balancing security and liberty. / Sagar, Rahul.

    In: Polity, Vol. 41, No. 2, 01.04.2009, p. 166-188.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    @article{89fd5e13965b4c109c8eff1c456b227d,
    title = "Who holds the balance? A missing detail in the debate over balancing security and liberty",
    abstract = "The question of how best to balance the pursuit of security with the protection of civil liberties has been heavily debated in recent years. This paper challenges the conclusions reached in that debate. It argues that although theorists have identified important subsidiary causes of imbalance, they do not address the structural dilemma posed by state secrecy, which creates an information asymmetry that allows officials to manipulate safeguards meant to secure an appropriate balance. Since this asymmetry cannot be easily resolved, imbalance remains a perennial danger that often can be addressed only retrospectively. Unfortunately, retrospection too can be stymied by the executive's control over state secrets, and it can also be undermined by partisanship, even when the relevant information becomes available. With this in mind, the paper identifies mechanisms to limit the abuse of state secrecy and indicates institutional features that may temper the adverse effects of partisanship.",
    keywords = "Balance, Civil liberties, Executive, Security, State secrecy, Terrorism",
    author = "Rahul Sagar",
    year = "2009",
    month = "4",
    day = "1",
    doi = "10.1057/pol.2008.27",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "41",
    pages = "166--188",
    journal = "Polity",
    issn = "0032-3497",
    publisher = "Palgrave Macmillan Ltd.",
    number = "2",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Who holds the balance? A missing detail in the debate over balancing security and liberty

    AU - Sagar, Rahul

    PY - 2009/4/1

    Y1 - 2009/4/1

    N2 - The question of how best to balance the pursuit of security with the protection of civil liberties has been heavily debated in recent years. This paper challenges the conclusions reached in that debate. It argues that although theorists have identified important subsidiary causes of imbalance, they do not address the structural dilemma posed by state secrecy, which creates an information asymmetry that allows officials to manipulate safeguards meant to secure an appropriate balance. Since this asymmetry cannot be easily resolved, imbalance remains a perennial danger that often can be addressed only retrospectively. Unfortunately, retrospection too can be stymied by the executive's control over state secrets, and it can also be undermined by partisanship, even when the relevant information becomes available. With this in mind, the paper identifies mechanisms to limit the abuse of state secrecy and indicates institutional features that may temper the adverse effects of partisanship.

    AB - The question of how best to balance the pursuit of security with the protection of civil liberties has been heavily debated in recent years. This paper challenges the conclusions reached in that debate. It argues that although theorists have identified important subsidiary causes of imbalance, they do not address the structural dilemma posed by state secrecy, which creates an information asymmetry that allows officials to manipulate safeguards meant to secure an appropriate balance. Since this asymmetry cannot be easily resolved, imbalance remains a perennial danger that often can be addressed only retrospectively. Unfortunately, retrospection too can be stymied by the executive's control over state secrets, and it can also be undermined by partisanship, even when the relevant information becomes available. With this in mind, the paper identifies mechanisms to limit the abuse of state secrecy and indicates institutional features that may temper the adverse effects of partisanship.

    KW - Balance

    KW - Civil liberties

    KW - Executive

    KW - Security

    KW - State secrecy

    KW - Terrorism

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=64549117341&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=64549117341&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1057/pol.2008.27

    DO - 10.1057/pol.2008.27

    M3 - Article

    VL - 41

    SP - 166

    EP - 188

    JO - Polity

    JF - Polity

    SN - 0032-3497

    IS - 2

    ER -