If Terrorist Groups Don't Seek Permission From Judges Before Attacking Their Targets, Why Should Those Who Fight Them Seek Judges' Permission To Mount Surveillance On Terrorist Suspects?

It is said that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Perhaps the road to a hell-on-earth in Ghana, tomorrow - should suicide bombers (perish the thought) strike during a well-attended outdoor event - will be paved with the good intentions of our  smug book-long-elites.

The question is: Why insist that even at a time when the whole of West Africa is threatened by terrorist organisations, the security agencies must obtain permission from judges, before listening in to the phone calls of terrorist suspects and sundry criminal types, as well as reading their emails?

Do the Boko Harams seek permission from judges before attacking their targets? Do counter-terrorist forces not need to react swiftly to terrorist attacks and contain the threat they pose to us all, at all material times? Is intelligence gathering, not an important  part of that equation, I ask?

Surely, our book-long-elites don't doubt the fact that terrorist organisations and religious extremists, ultimately seek to overthrow democratically elected governments - and impose themselves on free and open societies: in their quest for global domination?

Speaking personally, if by reading my emails and listening in to my telephone conversations with other parties, over a given period, that will somehow empower the security agencies to prevent a terrorist attack anywhere in Ghana, or lead to the apprehension of terrorists and other criminal types - such as illegal loggers, illegal gold miners and illegal sand-winners - that is most definitely acceptable to me.

Rather that, than be under the jackboots of vile and unhinged religious extremists, seeking to impose themselves on free societies worldwide, such as ours.

In any case, if one never views terrorist websites, and pornographic websites, and one neither plans criminal conspiracies with other parties on telephones and in emails, nor cheats on one's partner by having unwholesome conversations and smutty text message chat exchanges with other people's spouses, and sundry underage teenagers, why should being monitored electronically by our security agencies, be a problem?

Why should there be a problem with the security agencies monitoring one, without first obtaining permission to do so from judges - if one never defrauds people online by scamming them, and never emails and says things that will embarrass one if the world read one's emails and happened to listen to recordings of one's telephone conversations - if that will help those whose job it is to prevent serious crimes and terrorist attacks in Ghana, to better protect the Ghanaian Republic, and all who reside in it?

None, whatsoever, as far as this cantankerous old fogey is concerned. The question is: Does terrorism not pose an existential threat to our free society, and to our way of life, in our peaceful and democratic homeland, the Republic of Ghana? And, are we all not at risk, individually, of being murdered by terrorists exploding bombs and shooting indiscriminately into crowds at outdoor and indoor events, across Ghana?

Simply put, when it comes to intelligence gathering and mounting surveillance on terrorist suspects, it is always better to be safe, than sorry - which is why our security agencies ought be given the power to monitor the phone calls and emails of terrorist suspects, without seeking permission from judges to do so.

The fight against global terrorism is a war that humankind must win - and at whatever cost it will entail to bring about that victory. Victory for  the mad-dog types who run international terrorist organisations, such as Islamic State (IS), is simply too ghastly to contemplate.

The question there is:  Why hamstring the security agencies tasked to track and arrest terrorist suspects (and sundry master criminals), by asking them to seek permission from judges, before reading their emails and listening to their telephone conversations?

After all, any law-abiding Ghanaian, or foreigner, who lawfully resides here, who feels that the security agencies have abused his or her fundamental human rights, by listening in to their telephone conversations, and reading their emails, unjustifiably, is free to sue them in our law courts.

Is that not a sufficient enough safeguard to prevent the security agencies from widely abusing such powers, if it is granted to them by Parliament?

And, best of all, if, in addition to containing the threat posed by terrorists, the power to listen in to telephone conversations, and read emails, without first seeking permission from judges is granted to the security agencies, also enables them to track down  and arrest sundry criminal types, such as armed robbers, illegal loggers, illegal sand-winners, illegal gold miners, gold smugglers, and those selfish and super-ruthless individuals and groups sabotaging the nation-building effort for political gain, at the expense of Mother Ghana and the good people of Ghana, what could possibly be wrong with that? Zilch.

Indeed, it will make our country a safer place for us all - and help halt the creeping lawlessness and indiscipline that blights Ghanaian society today.

With respect, Parliament should ignore all those who for various reasons oppose giving the state the power to listen in on telephone conversations and to read the emails, of all persons resident in Ghana.

Many of the critics of the draft bill now before Parliament, have simply not thought through the implications of life under the iron fists of the Boko Harams of this world, should they finally succeed in their aim of enslaving us all.

Where will the demand by critics that the security agencies ought to seek permission from judges, before they proceed to listen in on telephone conversations, and read the emails of individuals and groups suspected of being members of terrorist organisations that are  targetting Mother Ghana, take us, when Boko Haram bombs and murders its way  to power in our homeland Ghana?

With the greatest respect, this is not an argument about fundamental human rights  in the cosy atmosphere of a political science faculty common-room in an ivory tower, amongst well-heeled academics. Our book-long-elites must be serious for once: This is a life and death matter about securing the safety of the Republic of Ghana in an era of global terrorism. It is a very grave matter - one that is far too important a real-world common-good issue to be left solely in the grasping hands of our educated urban elites. Period.