摘要：Normal.dotm 0 0 1 66 378 Queen's University 3 1 464 12.0 0 false 18 pt 18 pt 0 0 false false false /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} In February 2009 the House of Lords Constitutional Committee in the United Kingdom published the report Surveillance: Citizens and the State . Some have hailed this as a landmark document. Volume 6(3) of Surveillance & Society published 4 invited responses to this report written by prominent scholars. In the contribution below the two Specialist Advisers to this committee set the context for the report and provide a brief rejoinder to the four responses.
