Due to the globalization and nodalisation of intelligence - resulting in hybrid intelligence assemblages - well-known problems related to overseeing intelligence are deteriorating. Not only does the international cooperation between intelligence services contribute to this problem, but especially the internationalization of intelligence collection meaning that as a consequence of technological and market transformations intelligence collection has become footloose and can be conducted remotely. In that way it leaves any idea of national sovereignty or the national protection of civil rights increasingly obsolete. Instead of oversight by institutions the real counter-power in post-democratic constellations seems to be practised by whistleblowers and investigative journalists. Sousveillance or undersight therefore seems to be the most important current oversight mechanism.
H. Farell, ‘There is no alternative. Governments now answer to business, not voters. Mainstream parties grow ever harder to distinguish. Is democracy dead?’, in Aeon Magazine, 2013. http://www.aeonmagazine.com/living-together/henry-farrell-post-democracy/.
Jeffrey T. Richelson, ‘Intelligence Secrets and Unauthorized Disclosures: Confronting Some Fundamental Issues’, in International Journal of Intelligence and CounterIntelligence, 2012, no. 4, pp. 639-677.
Jay Rosen, ‘The NSA's next move: silencing university professors?’, The Guardian, 10 September 2013; The Guardian, ‘Glenn Greenwald's partner detained at Heathrow airport for nine hours: David Miranda, partner of Guardian interviewer of whistleblower Edward Snowden, questioned under Terrorism Act’, 19 August 2013; Alan Rusbridger, ‘David Miranda, schedule 7 and the danger that all reporters now face’, The Guardian, 19 August 2013; see for the use and misuse of media outlets by intelligence services Shlomo Shpiro, ‘The Media Strategies of Intelligence Services’, in International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence, 2001, no. 4, pp. 485-502.