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

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

AN - SCOPUS:64549117341

VL - 41

SP - 166

EP - 188

JO - Polity

JF - Polity

SN - 0032-3497

IS - 2

ER -