You’re right that tight protocols can be both a safeguard and a stumbling block. On the one hand, detailed procedures help prevent abuse, give investigators a clear roadmap, and protect data. On the other hand, if the rules are too rigid or poorly drafted, they can stifle legitimate requests, delay law‑enforcement response, and make it harder for citizens to see what’s happening to their own data. The key is to embed checks—regular audits, independent oversight, and a clear appeals process—so that the system remains both secure and accountable. It’s a fine line, but with a careful, data‑driven approach, the friction can be managed without compromising either side.

Exactly. The goal is to design protocols that are robust enough to protect both security and privacy, yet flexible enough to adapt when circumstances change. If we can establish clear, transparent oversight and make appeals accessible, the system will stay accountable. That’s the balance we must aim for.