Leader: Why privacy vs terrorism is no easy battle

Europe's head of data protection - the EDPS - hit out this week at claims civil liberties advocates have been hampering anti-terror laws, adding that no good law can be passed without including some measures designed to keep citizens' data safe.

It's a debate that recurs over and over again whenever such laws are on the table - remember the European data retention directive and Ripa? Privacy advocates campaigned against both, labelling them a heavy-handed approach without due respect of the individual's rights.

Tramping over individual freedoms and liberties is the behaviour of terrorists - it should not be what we expect from our government.

Politicians in turn say there are bound to be instances where individuals must give up rights for the greater good; occasionally couching their retorts in language that would have you believe only woolly headed hippy throwbacks are genuinely concerned about such matters.

It's easy to use such throwaway remarks: after all, what civil libertarian won't come off worse when he's accused of impeding a government crusade to halt terrorism? And dismissing the civil liberties issues gives governments a little grease to get controversial legislation through parliament without having to work out those tricky privacy kinks.

As political climates change of course legislation must change with it - but there is no excuse for not writing data protection into the heart of laws, especially one such as the European data retention directive where such safeguards are so clearly needed.

Such laws are often rushed through in response to world events, when the desire to do something - anything - to counter new threats looms large in politicians' minds. Of course, when such threats recede, the legislation is not repealed with equal alacrity.

And that is why such legislation cannot be handled carefully enough. Tramping over individual freedoms and liberties is the behaviour of terrorists - it should not be what we expect from our government.