Earlier this week, we blogged about forthcoming legislative responses to the Snowden revelations. Here’s a critical view putting them into a wider perspective.
On Wednesday, Human Rights Watch General Counsel Dinah Pokempner fleshed out how current proposals on Capitol Hill miss critical points in placing surveillance under stricter control.
Her discussion of the Snowden revelations differentiates between the following National Security Agency (NSA) activities:
- Bulk collection of metadata (associated with PRISM)
- Wiretapping of foreign leaders
- Infiltration of internal networks of Google und Yahoo located abroad (associated with MUSCULAR)
As Human Rights Watch points out, the currently debated proposals relate specifically to the Patriot Act and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA); therefore, they cover only the NSA’s bulk collection of metadata. Operated abroad, the other two surveillance programs are beyond the scope of the mentioned statutes and their respective reform bills. The wiretapping of foreign leaders, as well as the infiltration of Google’s and Yahoo’s facilities abroad are authorized by Executive Order 12333 on United States Intelligence Activities, which tasks the NSA to
“[c]ollect (including through clandestine means), process, analyze, produce, and disseminate signals intelligence information and data for foreign intelligence and counterintelligence purposes to supportnational and departmental missions” (Part 1, Section 1.3 (c)),
in order to
“. . . enhance human and technical collection techniques, especially those undertaken abroad, and the acquisition of significant foreign intelligence . . . ” (Part 2, Section 2.2).
With the bulk collection of metadata taken care of, Pokempner’s statement draws attention to the fact that none of the current proposals provides comprehensive congressional oversight of all US surveillance programs.
4 Pingbacks