The access can also be used for political espionage by ruling political figures to cub opposition leading to dictatorial regimes. Research by Amnesty International has shown that surveillance laws in many countries are being used to suppress free speech.

Data breaches to terrorist groups can lead to a leak in state secrets placing the publics at a higher risk than intended.

Privacy concerns: Allowing government entities access to private communications can be viewed as an infringement on individual privacy and civil liberties.

Potential for misuse: There is a genuine potential for such powers to be misused, which might lead to the monitoring of innocent citizens, or to uses outside of such counter-terrorism activities.

Effectiveness debated: Some experts have noted that, even if such access were permitted, the ability for officials to discern threats is questionable given the extent of stored data; additionally, allowing for less secure forms of encryption will jeopardize security for everyone.

"Backdoors" could undermine security: If a technically feasible "backdoor" for an encrypted form of communications was created for the government to surveil, it could also weaken security for all users since it could be abused and used by malicious hackers.

Additionally many proposed (not yet passed) legislations in countries at the moment surrounding this are suggesting the use of AI systems to flag "suspicious" content - AI is known for being innacurate and prone to errors, the idea of it being used to check people's private messages for content "suspected of terrorism" is incredibly flawed and could lead to the prosecution of innocent people.

It could also cause people to become suspicious of the goverment, so they wouldn't trust them in the future.

Terrorists also often use more advanced and untraceable methods to communicate therfore it might not even be an effective way to combat terrorism.