How the US fuels Latin America's surveillance technology--Al Jazeera
0 views
Skip to first unread message
molly
May 21, 2012, 12:55:43 PM5/21/12
to fronte...@googlegroups.com
Worth going to the link for their links...
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/05/2012514135631527464.html
Katitza Rodriguez
Katitza Rodriguez is the International Rights Director at the
Electronic Frontier Foundation.
Rebecca Bowe
Rebecca Bowe is the International Privacy Coordinator on the
Electronic Frontier Foundation's international team.
How the US fuels Latin America's surveillance technology
The US war on drugs often bolsters anti-democratic forces abroad, say authors.
Last Modified: 21 May 2012 09:17
Under President Alvaro Uribe, the Colombian government targeted
political opponents and human rights activists [EPA]
San Francisco, California - In executing its wars on terror and drugs,
the United States has been aiding the adoption of surveillance
technologies in Latin America for decades.
In Colombia, these surveillance technologies have been repurposed to
silence judges and opposition voices, demonstrating the ease with
which they can be abused to subvert the rule of law in any democratic
nation lacking robust checks and balances. Nevertheless, the US
government recently unveiled a plan to help the Mexican government
triple the size of a national surveillance system to assist with
counternarcotics efforts. It's the latest example of the United
States' quiet practice of helping foreign security agencies expand
their reach, a trend that warrants close scrutiny. Amid Mexican
government corruption, secrecy in the judiciary, and killings
allegedly involving government security forces, activists are worried
that a Mexican surveillance upgrade will only compromise the privacy
of law-abiding citizens, affecting both Mexicans and their foreign
contacts.
In a call for bids published on April 27, the US Bureau of
International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs said it would
award a contract to upgrade a surveillance system from 30 to 107
monitoring stations. Installed by a New York-based company called
Verint in 2006, the system can interceptcommunications from "national
telephonic and other communications service providers in Mexico".
The stated objective is to deter narcotics trafficking, terrorism and
other "serious crimes" by aiding Mexico's Public Security Secretariat.
The notice comes on the heels of a newly approved set of
unconstitutional revisions to Mexican federal laws - revisions that
recently prompted an outcry from privacy advocates. The amendments
give law enforcement unprecedented ability to pinpoint the whereabouts
of cell phone users, without judicial oversight. The Mexican Ombudsman
has recently filed an unconstitutionality action against the law.
This United States investment in Mexico's surveillance apparatus is
not a new trend. In February of 2007, the State Department awarded a
$3m contract to Verint for a Communications Intercept System to be
used by Mexico's Federal Investigations Agency (AFI). This lawful
interception technology was designed to make it possible for the
Mexican intelligence agency to intercept communications from telephone
and internet providers, including VoIP networks, landlines, faxes,
emails, chats, IRC, and SMS text messages. It created a centralised
monitoring centre, enabling cellular and location tracking with
capacity to store phone calls for at least 25,000 hours.
United States efforts to ferret out narco-traffickers by providing
surveillance technology to foreign governments havebackfired in the
past. For instance, the Colombian government misused American cash and
equipment to target political opponents and human rights activists
rather than drug lords. The "Las Chuzadas" scandal erupted around
former Colombian President Alvaro Uribe and Colombia's intelligence
agency (DAS) in 2009. As a result, a former head of the intelligence
agency from 2002-2005, Jorge Noguera, was sentenced to 25 years in
jail for targeting political activists and collaborating with
paramilitary death squads. Noguera's successor, now-former DAS head
Maria del Pilar Hurtado, was forced to flee to Panama in order to
avoid facing charges over illegal wiretapping of government opponents.
These various scandals ultimately led to the dissolution of the DAS.
Instead of focussing on drug lords, DAS used the US
government-supplied wiretapping devices, cameras, and cell phone
interception systems to spy on political opponents, journalists,
labour organisers, and even NGOs seeking to alleviate human rights
abuses. Noguera then facilitated a paramilitary group's selective
murder of trade unionists and other activists in Colombia by providing
the paramilitaries with detailed dossiers on these political opponents
in order to facilitate their execution.
The DAS also sought to neutralise the work of the European Parliament
Human Rights Commission by using smear campaigns in an attempt to
discredit the work of human rights defenders, and silence and
manipulate critical voicesin the media. In September of 2002, soon
after Colombian President Alvaro Uribe took office, he emphasised his
priorities: "We will not stop. We will spray and spray. We will
intercept. We will seize. We will do all the best every day and every
night to destroy narcotics in Colombia."
A diplomatic cable released by WikiLeaks revealed that when the
surveillance was in full swing, a US ambassador had warned Uribe that
their partnership would suffer if word of illegal activity got out.
Later, the US governmentannounced the suspension of its aid to the
DAS.
DAS misuse of US-sponsored surveillance equipment for internal
political oppression was not unique among Latin American countries.
Another cable, sent from the US Embassy in Paraguay to the US
Government in February 2010 (and disclosed by WikiLeaks), revealed
that Paraguay had partnered with the US Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA)
on a mobile phone spying programme. Although the purpose of this
partnership was to combat drug trafficking, according to the cable
Paraguayan authorities petitioned the US government to grant use of
the eavesdropping equipment for purposes outside the scope of
counter-narcotics. Top governmental officials wanted to spy on members
of their own Paraguayan People's Army, which they treated as a higher
priority than investigating drug traffickers.
Similar government sentiments were evident in Panama, where a leaked
cable from August of 2009 revealed that President Ricardo Martinelli
repeatedly requested technical assistance from the United States to
expand its wiretapping capacity for political gain: "President
Martinelli has reached out to the Embassy, among other actors, to
request help in building infrastructure to conduct wiretaps against
ostensible security threats as well as political opponents". The US
Ambassador warned against Martinelli's intention to illegally surveil
his people:
"Martinelli's seeming fixation with wiretaps and his comments to
Ambassador during an August 12 meeting demonstrate that he may be
willing to set aside the rule of law in order to achieve his political
and developmental goals."
Moreover, the US Ambassador notes in the cable that: "[Martinelli]
made reference to various groups and individuals whom he believes
should be wiretapped, and he clearly made no distinction between
legitimate security targets and political enemies." In this instance,
at least, the US Ambassador recommends against supporting politically
motivated wiretaps and points to the catastrophic consequences of Las
Chuzadas scandal in Colombia as reason not to proceed. However, it is
clear that the domestic inclination to use US-sponsored surveillance
equipment for illegal political wiretapping was alive and well in
President Martinelli's regime.
As it moves ahead with aid to enhance the Mexican government's
surveillance capacity, the US government should take note of these
cautionary tales. In its zeal to fight the war on drugs, the United
States could wind up leading those struggling democratic nations down
the dangerous path of further erosion of civil liberties and the rule
of law.
From the widespread abuses committed against Uribe's opponents in
Colombia to the requests for use of DEA-supplied wiretapping
technology to target political enemies in Panama, history has taught
us that building up powerful government surveillance infrastructure
will often lead to abuse in democracies lacking robust check and
balances. Whether for political gain or in the hands of agencies that
have fallen victim to corruption, enhanced surveillance capacity can
be illegally used to jeopardize the privacy and lives of law-abiding
dissidents and journalists, placing them in physical danger or at risk
of death. Without great caution, the results of the United States'
surveillance-driven drug enforcement efforts may be antithetical to
its state mandate for freedom and democracy.
Katitza Rodriguez is the International Rights Director at the
Electronic Frontier Foundation.
Rebecca Bowe is the International Privacy Coordinator on the
Electronic Frontier Foundation's international team.
Follow her on Twitter: @ByRebeccaBowe
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not
necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy.
Source:
Al Jazeera
political opponents and human rights activists [EPA]
San Francisco, California - In executing its wars on terror and drugs,
the United States has been aiding the adoption of surveillance
technologies in Latin America for decades.
In Colombia, these surveillance technologies have been repurposed to
silence judges and opposition voices, demonstrating the ease with
which they can be abused to subvert the rule of law in any democratic
nation lacking robust checks and balances. Nevertheless, the US
government recently unveiled a plan to help the Mexican government
triple the size of a national surveillance system to assist with
counternarcotics efforts. It's the latest example of the United
States' quiet practice of helping foreign security agencies expand
their reach, a trend that warrants close scrutiny. Amid Mexican
government corruption, secrecy in the judiciary, and killings
allegedly involving government security forces, activists are worried
that a Mexican surveillance upgrade will only compromise the privacy
of law-abiding citizens, affecting both Mexicans and their foreign
contacts.
In a call for bids published on April 27, the US Bureau of
International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs said it would
award a contract to upgrade a surveillance system from 30 to 107
monitoring stations. Installed by a New York-based company called
Verint in 2006, the system can interceptcommunications from "national
telephonic and other communications service providers in Mexico".
The stated objective is to deter narcotics trafficking, terrorism and
other "serious crimes" by aiding Mexico's Public Security Secretariat.
The notice comes on the heels of a newly approved set of
unconstitutional revisions to Mexican federal laws - revisions that
recently prompted an outcry from privacy advocates. The amendments
give law enforcement unprecedented ability to pinpoint the whereabouts
of cell phone users, without judicial oversight. The Mexican Ombudsman
has recently filed an unconstitutionality action against the law.
This United States investment in Mexico's surveillance apparatus is
not a new trend. In February of 2007, the State Department awarded a
$3m contract to Verint for a Communications Intercept System to be
used by Mexico's Federal Investigations Agency (AFI). This lawful
interception technology was designed to make it possible for the
Mexican intelligence agency to intercept communications from telephone
and internet providers, including VoIP networks, landlines, faxes,
emails, chats, IRC, and SMS text messages. It created a centralised
monitoring centre, enabling cellular and location tracking with
capacity to store phone calls for at least 25,000 hours.
United States efforts to ferret out narco-traffickers by providing
surveillance technology to foreign governments havebackfired in the
past. For instance, the Colombian government misused American cash and
equipment to target political opponents and human rights activists
rather than drug lords. The "Las Chuzadas" scandal erupted around
former Colombian President Alvaro Uribe and Colombia's intelligence
agency (DAS) in 2009. As a result, a former head of the intelligence
agency from 2002-2005, Jorge Noguera, was sentenced to 25 years in
jail for targeting political activists and collaborating with
paramilitary death squads. Noguera's successor, now-former DAS head
Maria del Pilar Hurtado, was forced to flee to Panama in order to
avoid facing charges over illegal wiretapping of government opponents.
These various scandals ultimately led to the dissolution of the DAS.
Instead of focussing on drug lords, DAS used the US
government-supplied wiretapping devices, cameras, and cell phone
interception systems to spy on political opponents, journalists,
labour organisers, and even NGOs seeking to alleviate human rights
abuses. Noguera then facilitated a paramilitary group's selective
murder of trade unionists and other activists in Colombia by providing
the paramilitaries with detailed dossiers on these political opponents
in order to facilitate their execution.
The DAS also sought to neutralise the work of the European Parliament
Human Rights Commission by using smear campaigns in an attempt to
discredit the work of human rights defenders, and silence and
manipulate critical voicesin the media. In September of 2002, soon
after Colombian President Alvaro Uribe took office, he emphasised his
priorities: "We will not stop. We will spray and spray. We will
intercept. We will seize. We will do all the best every day and every
night to destroy narcotics in Colombia."
A diplomatic cable released by WikiLeaks revealed that when the
surveillance was in full swing, a US ambassador had warned Uribe that
their partnership would suffer if word of illegal activity got out.
Later, the US governmentannounced the suspension of its aid to the
DAS.
DAS misuse of US-sponsored surveillance equipment for internal
political oppression was not unique among Latin American countries.
Another cable, sent from the US Embassy in Paraguay to the US
Government in February 2010 (and disclosed by WikiLeaks), revealed
that Paraguay had partnered with the US Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA)
on a mobile phone spying programme. Although the purpose of this
partnership was to combat drug trafficking, according to the cable
Paraguayan authorities petitioned the US government to grant use of
the eavesdropping equipment for purposes outside the scope of
counter-narcotics. Top governmental officials wanted to spy on members
of their own Paraguayan People's Army, which they treated as a higher
priority than investigating drug traffickers.
Similar government sentiments were evident in Panama, where a leaked
cable from August of 2009 revealed that President Ricardo Martinelli
repeatedly requested technical assistance from the United States to
expand its wiretapping capacity for political gain: "President
Martinelli has reached out to the Embassy, among other actors, to
request help in building infrastructure to conduct wiretaps against
ostensible security threats as well as political opponents". The US
Ambassador warned against Martinelli's intention to illegally surveil
his people:
"Martinelli's seeming fixation with wiretaps and his comments to
Ambassador during an August 12 meeting demonstrate that he may be
willing to set aside the rule of law in order to achieve his political
and developmental goals."
Moreover, the US Ambassador notes in the cable that: "[Martinelli]
made reference to various groups and individuals whom he believes
should be wiretapped, and he clearly made no distinction between
legitimate security targets and political enemies." In this instance,
at least, the US Ambassador recommends against supporting politically
motivated wiretaps and points to the catastrophic consequences of Las
Chuzadas scandal in Colombia as reason not to proceed. However, it is
clear that the domestic inclination to use US-sponsored surveillance
equipment for illegal political wiretapping was alive and well in
President Martinelli's regime.
As it moves ahead with aid to enhance the Mexican government's
surveillance capacity, the US government should take note of these
cautionary tales. In its zeal to fight the war on drugs, the United
States could wind up leading those struggling democratic nations down
the dangerous path of further erosion of civil liberties and the rule
of law.
From the widespread abuses committed against Uribe's opponents in
Colombia to the requests for use of DEA-supplied wiretapping
technology to target political enemies in Panama, history has taught
us that building up powerful government surveillance infrastructure
will often lead to abuse in democracies lacking robust check and
balances. Whether for political gain or in the hands of agencies that
have fallen victim to corruption, enhanced surveillance capacity can
be illegally used to jeopardize the privacy and lives of law-abiding
dissidents and journalists, placing them in physical danger or at risk
of death. Without great caution, the results of the United States'
surveillance-driven drug enforcement efforts may be antithetical to
its state mandate for freedom and democracy.
Katitza Rodriguez is the International Rights Director at the
Electronic Frontier Foundation.
Rebecca Bowe is the International Privacy Coordinator on the
Electronic Frontier Foundation's international team.
Follow her on Twitter: @ByRebeccaBowe
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not
necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy.
Source:
Al Jazeera
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages