Public revolt to quash biometric ID chips
Pastor Dale Morgan
Public revolt to quash biometric ID chips*
Citizens score success abroad while opposition to national card grows in
U.S.
Posted: January 27, 2007
While opposition grows to a national ID card in the U.S., citizens of
the southeast European nation of Serbia have successfully pressed their
government to back off on a plan to make biometric data chips compulsory
in the country's new citizen cards.
The decision followed a pitched battle prior to the Jan. 21 election as
opponents criticized the accompanying plan for a centralized database of
citizen information and the taking of fingerprints. Biometric technology
uses data from sources such as fingerprints, facial features and iris
scans to authenticate a person's identity.
In the U.S., the Real ID Act passed by Congress in 2005 calls for a
national ID portion to go into effect by May 2008. It requires states to
participate in a federal data-sharing program when issuing driver's
licenses, making those licenses de facto national ID cards.
A number of state legislatures have passed nonbinding measures in
opposition, including the Maine House and Senate, which yesterday almost
unanimously approved a resolution refusing to implement the Real ID Act.
Responding to public outcry in Serbia, Prime Minister Vojislav
Kostunica's administration, in one of its last acts in office, took the
unusual step of announcing a decree before the government's session this
month.
Serbian Interior Minister Dragan Jocic told the press that "due to
privacy concerns raised by citizens" the new Law on Identification Cards
would be modified to ensure the chips, with a digitalized photo and
fingerprint, would be included only upon the card holder's specific request.
Citizens' groups and non-governmental organizations that initiated an
opposition campaign after the law passed last July applauded the
concession but vowed to continue the fight until the entire law was
struck down.
Attorney Dragoljub Djordjevic, a founder of the group that spearheaded
the anti-biometric media campaign, For Life without Branding, says his
organization plans to challenge the law in the Serbian Supreme Court.
"That would have been our first step if not for the fact that the court
has had a vacancy for months and cannot legally convene," said
Djordjevic, who is also vice president of the Serbian Bar Association.
"As soon as it does, however, we shall challenge the centralized
database the police plan to set up as an unconstitutional invasion of
privacy. We shall also challenge the taking of fingerprints of normal,
law-abiding citizens as though they were convicted criminals."
Large public outcry developed over the way the law was passed – without
prior public debate – and a scandal inside the Interior Ministry itself
arose from the purchase of equipment for more than $100 million outside
of regular procurement procedures and a full three years before the law
itself came before the parliament.
Church helped lead the way
Observers agree the Serbian Orthodox Church made the biggest difference.
During its bi-annual Holy Assembly of Archpriests in early October, the
church issued a decision delegating the Holy Synod – its executive body
– to "intervene with the relevant authorities in order to prevent the
recently-passed Law on ID cards from being put into practice."
The Serbian Church followed the pattern of similar protests in 2000-2002
within the Greek and Russian Orthodox Churches, when their respective
governments attempted to institute compulsory electronic ID cards and
tax numbers. Many church members raised objections to having an object –
the "smart chip" – on their ID cards tied to data to which they didn't
have free access. They also were wary of having their personal data
centralized in electronic form and available to unspecified third parties.
Serbians additionally became irritated when the Interior Ministry's
claims that "such ID cards were already widely used in the European
Union" were proven false. Most countries in Western Europe either have
optional biometric ID cards or non-compulsory ID cards, and few have
centralized ID databases.
Also, IT professionals were angered by another Interior Ministry
contention– that the biometric ID would ease introduction of government
electronic services
"Electronic government services do not require an ID card at all,"
insisted Oliver Subotic, a computer expert and theologian, who has
written two books on the ethics of IT technology and on biometrics.
"Accessing e-government services by way of an ID card is a needless
intrusion of privacy. Many European Union countries have well-developed
e-government services without having issued electronic ID cards at all."
Finally, Serbian public opinion, still sensitive to NATO after its 1999
bombing campaign, was receptive to arguments that the ID cards – with
parts of its system purchased from Motorola – were a potential avenue
for spying on the country's database.
"Motorola has been working closely with the Pentagon for decades," says
Sladjan Mijaljevic, head of the nongovernmental group Truth. "How do we
know that there aren't backdoor Trojan viruses installed making our
nation's personal data an open book?"
The grass-roots campaign was perhaps the first to successfully challenge
the central government since the deposing of former Yugoslavian and
Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic in street demonstrations in October
2000.
Some observes say that amid the hardships of the "transition" from a
socialist to a capitalist economy with its heavy unemployment and
economic uncertainty, the anti-biometric chip campaign may be the
harbinger of new winds blowing on the Serbian political scene.
Meanwhile, in America …
In the U.S., the Real ID Act stipulates that after May 11, 2008, "a
federal agency may not accept, for any official purpose, a driver's
license or identification card issued by a State to any person unless
the State is meeting the requirements" specified in the Real ID Act.
While states can issue non-federal ID cards, they would not be accepted
by the Transportation Security Administration for travel purposes,
grounding those who don't carry federally approved cards.
The data required to be included in each card are, among other things,
the person's full legal name, date of birth, gender, driver's license
number, a digital photo, the person's address and machine-readable
technology so the information can be ready easily by government or
banking personnel.
Each state must agree to share the data on the cards with every other state.
Supporters of the law say it does not require a "national" ID card
because each state issues its own cards, not the federal government. But
detractors note the cards are virtual national IDs since the federal law
has dictated what data must be included and that each state must share
its database with the others.
The Department of Transportation, acting through a Security and
Prosperity Partnership "working group," is preparing this year to issue
North American biometric border passes to Mexican, Canadian, and U.S.
"trusted travelers" according to documents released under a Freedom of
Information Act request.