The Fifth Amendment states, in part, that \"no person shall be held to answer fo

Question

The Fifth Amendment states, in part, that "no person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury. . . ." Understanding this, do you feel that a suspect should be required to reveal a password he or she used to encrypt personal data? Do you feel that the government has the right to demand the password? To break the encryption when the suspect does not reveal it? Should the severity of the alleged crime matter? That is, should the government be allowed to make case-by-case decisions on whether to demand the password or break the encryption?

Explanation / Answer

Yes ofcourse government may take case by case decisions. All the demands whether it is password or breaking of encryption by government should depends on the sevarity of the crime. If the crime is related to the public or if any public is effected by this then there is no offence if governemt demands. If it is related personal thing or between persons then it might not the write one to do and again this also depends on the situation of the case.

If the case result is only depends on that personal encrypted data then first the government and officials must first need to priliminary enquiries and investigations throughly. After all the attempts they dont get to any conclusion then it will the only option to break the encryption they might have demand the suspect. If suspect have any obligations then they can break the encryption.

Even if they demand or break and finally accessed and gone through the personal data of suspect that data should not made public. Investigations and all those things might need to be done secretly with utmost care.  

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse T
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.