Democratic surveillance of intelligence

In today's world, security strategies are not only confined to military concentration, but they have begun to evolve to include security aspects in economic, human, ecological, commercial and legal fields. As the importance and value of intelligence increased day by day, the value of national and international values led to the expansion of the room of the searchable intelligence in more important situations and the issue of surveillance was brought to the agenda. The necessity of change in the field of intelligence is of course the breakthrough, development and changes experienced in technology. Especially internet and computer based development and changes have been reflected to the intelligence activities at a dizzying speed. Information technology is considered as a very important tool for the acquisition, storage, classification and evaluation of data. The effectiveness of the intelligence activities carried out depends on the legitimate realization of the protection of confidentiality. In this context, legitimacy is based on the legal regulations on how to make intelligence to the intelligence institutions and organizations. Although the concept of surveillance, which has many interdisciplinary qualities in sociology, communication and anthropology, is an action that occurs between individuals in the history of religions and historical process, it is important for states to provide and maintain authority. Since the existence of mankind, individual or group interests in the surveillance of the point has been started primarily with the intelligence of the individual, military discipline-intelligence, state administration-census, workplace monitoring-control, police activities-fight against crime, has continued to develop until today. It is commonplace that there are a number of mechanisms that are feasible to use and are legitimate to use to talk about democratic oversight. In fact, it is also necessary to activate and define "civil actors", "media", "parliament", "judiciary" and "ombudsman olan who will do this or support it. When this situation is evaluated separately from the security institutions and when deemed necessary, the presence of civil actors asking for accountability from the state institutions and demanding the protection of freedoms and rights with the expectation of transparency should be accepted as the first condition of an understanding that spreads a democratic existence to the smallest cell of the society. In this study, the view of the democratic surveillance of intelligence in the context of intelligence, surveillance and intelligence and surveillance, and the ways in which the democratic surveillance of intelligence can be provided by which actors and in what ways and the necessity of the surveillance in the modern state understanding are mentioned. Keywords: Intelligence, Survelliance, Security, Parliament, Media, Judiciary, NobGovernmental Organization, ombudsman