European Officials Challenge U.S. Policy on Travelers’ Data
This article is from the archive of The New York Sun before the launch of its new website in 2022. The Sun has neither altered nor updated such articles but will seek to correct any errors, mis-categorizations or other problems introduced during transfer.
LONDON — The demand by America that airlines surrender comprehensive information about passengers traveling to America faces a fresh challenge from European members of Parliament and privacy campaigners. They are hoping to block October’s deal that gave Washington access to e-mail and credit card accounts of anyone booking a flight to America. The agreement runs out in July.
The move follows the American decision to extend the use of the data beyond the scope of the original agreement, which was struck to prevent European airlines being banned from American airports.
Opposition to the original agreement increased when the American government published details of its new “automated targeting system,” which it wants to use to screen people entering and leaving the country. This goes even further than the 34 pieces of passenger data that airlines have been forced to provide as a condition of landing in America.
The data already allows the Americans — subject to legal authority such as a subpoena — to demand the surrender of an array of information about passengers. These rights can be exercised for the prevention of terrorism and other transnational crimes. The automated system assigns a score calculating what terrorist threat a passenger might pose.
According to the document, published by the Department of Homeland Security, the information “may be disclosed” to outside agencies for other reasons.
These include assisting in the enforcement of civil as well as criminal rules, enabling the American and foreign governments to make assessments when considering job offers or security clearance.
Other grounds include helping the courts when involved in civil litigation or helping American and foreign governments deal with threats to public health. The information may also be made available where the American authorities believe “there is a risk of harm to economic or property interests.”
Legal opinion on the status of the document differed. Some lawyers believe it is already in force, and others described it as Washington’s “shopping list” for the next round of talks. “
