The USA Patriot Act - Essay Example

THE PATRIOT ACT (History and Political Science) of Introduction This paper is about the USA Patriot Act which is a bill passed by the United States of America Congress and was signed into law on October 26, 2001 by former President George W. Bush that became effective on February 01, 2002. This was a law made hurriedly because of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on American soil, and the reaction of the American public. In the aftermath of the said terrorist attacks, Americans no longer felt safe as the attacks showed the vulnerability of the United States despite its huge budgetary allocations for national security. It exposed weaknesses in the intelligence community which failed in its job to protect American interests by not being able to predict and prevent when or where the strikes will occur; they were not able to interpret correctly despite all the warnings, a failure of “connecting the dots.” This act is actually an acronym, which stands for Uniting and Strengthening America (USA) while Patriot stands for Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism. This law has many pertinent provisions designed to fight terrorism but a primary aim was to strengthen law enforcement capabilities against any future terror attacks on America. The law likewise contained so-called “sunset” provisions designed to lapse after December 31, 2005 based on the assessment by security experts on the continued existence of terrorist threats. The paper will discuss the important provisions of the USA Patriot Act and the effects on civil liberties and personal freedoms. Among the provisions discussed will be concerning the regulation of financial transactions to deny the terrorists their sources of funding, the broadened discretionary authority of law enforcement and immigration officials to detain, deport, and try in courts these terror suspects, and the continued policy debates about this Act, among others. Discussion A consequence of the worst-ever terrorist attack on American soil caused the creation of a single government agency charged with protecting the country and its citizens. The Department of Homeland Security was created in 2002 and currently has about 240,000 federal employees in its payroll. This department is a unified, integrated cabinet-level agency tasked with the mission of protecting American citizens from attacks emanating from land, sea, air, and even in the cyber space (Department of Homeland Security, 2013, para. 1) such as prevention of hacking attempts. Americans now seriously take security precautions, together with the added inconvenience of the body search, baggage checks, airport check-in cameras, and other security measures. Before the attacks, America was a country that had one of the most open, generous, and lenient immigration policies in the world because of its past history of being an immigrant nation but it changed suddenly with stricter border controls, at airports, sea ports, and all possible points of entry for a potential terrorist. Moreover, one key provision of the Patriot Act was an enhanced or expanded definition of terrorism to now include domestic terrorism (home-grown terrorists). It greatly widened the number and type of suspicious activities where enforcement can be used. In the previous definition, terrorism was only understood to be foreign or global in nature. A. Regulation of Financial Transactions The war against terrorism is not a simple task, as terrorism is a many-headed enemy and can show it ugly head in many unexpected areas. A key part in the fight against terrorism is help choke off terrorist financing which is a vital component in carrying out most terrorist attacks. 1. Money Laundering – money that is purposely hidden from financial authorities can be used for illicit activities. There are many hidden economic, social, and political costs to monies which did not enter the legitimate financial system because it is not invested properly to create new jobs, or to make profitable investments that will promote economic growth. In the estimates of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), about $3.63 trillion is laundered annually using various means to remit money without being noticed. This amount represents approximately 5% of total global gross domestic product (GDP) and is a big risk to the worlds formal financial system as big amounts can be moved around that can potentially destabilize global economy (ADB, 2008). The greater risk is when crime syndicates team up with terrorist networks in an unholy alliance, to finance the terroristic activities, for the sole purpose of creating fear, havoc, and mayhem. 2. Financial Surveillance – a provision of the Patriot Act (Title III) specifically aims to prevent, detect, prosecute, and confiscate any funds deemed to be part of international money laundering activities, specially if such funds are intended to finance terrorism. Banking rules are tightened to prevent terrorist organizations from using formal banking channels to transfer funds. The Patriot Act also amended certain provisions of previous laws, more specifically that of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) of 1970 to allow authorities to look into the beneficial or real owners of certain bank accounts in cases of suspected “dirty money” without the need for any court order. The other law that was amended is the Money Laundering Control Act (MLCA) of 1986. This time, financial institutions are required to report certain transactions beyond a threshold amount so that authorities can be alerted to the aggregate amount remitted. The idea is to detect certain patterns in financial transactions from thousands of seemingly-unrelated or innocent remittances. 3. Civil Forfeitures – once laundered money is identified to have come from an illegal or an illicit source, the next step is to confiscate these funds in order to disrupt the flow of funds. This disruption is a big hindrance to terror networks to carry out further attacks, as it complicates their strategic and operational tasks. The Patriot Act provides for greater cooperation between the different national security agencies and financial institutions by mandating the sharing of all vital information. Sequestration of laundered funds denies to the terrorists the use of these funds for further activities and severely limits their tactical capabilities. Unlike in a criminal case where a burden of proof is needed, in civil forfeitures the situation is somewhat reversed. A government agency files suit to recover ill-gotten funds and assets, and the burden of proof is shifted to the original owner of the said funds or assets to prove all these came from legitimate sources. It has been proven to be an effective tool against terrorism and crime syndicates (Miller 1996). Funds so recovered can be used to compensate terror victims, increasing the operational budget of the concerned agency, or to hire more intelligence agents to gather information (Young 2009). B. Detention and Deportation of Immigrants Border agents and immigration officials can now detain suspected new immigrants. The previously lax and porous borders are now under stricter scrutiny, with security checks and use of surveillance cameras along stretches of the border and at all possible entry points. Tourists or businessmen or students who come to America are likewise subject to security measures through the use of negative airline passenger lists; those found on a list are arrested or not allowed entry. The Patriot Act allows for mandatory detention of suspected immigrants for up to ninety days but can be extended for another six months and then renewed again, almost indefinitely. 1. Racial Profiling – one ugly outcome of the obsession with security measures is that it produced certain phobias with regards to some ethnic groups. This had been the case with some minorities being targeted wrongly because of mistaken identities. An example are the Sikhs in America, whose religion requires them to wear long beards, which are very similar to that of the Muslim terrorists who carried out the 9/11 twin tower attacks in New York and elsewhere. It had made them convenient scapegoats although they are peace-loving citizens of this country. There are many non-whites who suffered undue surveillance because of mere suspicions based on their skin color. These people had also been subjected to wrongful arrests without any strong basis. In a country like America where there is supposed to be freedom and equality among all the races, there is still persistent prejudice and bias against people of color, no matter what their origins or their professions. The Civil Rights Movement achieved a very good measure of success for black Americans, but still many racial discriminatory practices remain in terms of jobs, education, the demands for housing, health care, and other social services. Terror attacks shifted from the racial discrimination into shady or secret racial profiling of other minority groups (Kops, 2006). 2. Indefinite Detention – as mentioned earlier elsewhere, new immigrants are now to be checked more thoroughly when they apply for a visa and eventually, also for citizenship. What it means for them is the immigration process has become more complex, and many of them were denied entry due to some suspicious activities they may have had previously in their countries of origin. The information can be derived from some background investigations on certain activities which could be construed as related to terrorism. Expanded discretionary powers had led to some cases of well-documented abuses in the detention of suspects, even non-citizens (Biddle, 2009). 3. Rendition – this is the secret, and the most controversial aspect, of the Patriot Act that is not so well discussed in public until it was exposed by the media. Rendition is a legal process by which suspects and criminals are transferred from one jurisdiction or country to another place for the purpose of being interrogated further. It is normally allowed by law, and extradition is the most common and foremost example of rendition. However, rendition acquired a bad reputation after it was exposed by some investigative journalists that the United States had employed what is termed as extraordinary (illegal) rendition by sending terror suspects to countries known to be using torture during interrogations to extract vital information. The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was operating clandestinely a global network of secret incarceration that involved at least one hundred fifty terror suspects, sending them to anywhere around the world. This type or kind of rendition is deemed extra-legal (outside of the law) and is considered a form of kidnapping. 4. Enhanced Interrogation Techniques – the use of torture against prisoners of war or POWS had long been outlawed by the Geneva Convention. Moreover, the same prohibition also applies against using torture as part of interrogation of criminal or terror suspects, whom the law considers as innocent until proven guilty or otherwise. The United States of America, in its war on terror, had gone to great lengths to protect itself from perceived but unseen enemies. In this regard, it may have also violated some basic human rights of these terror suspects. The United Nations forbids torture under Article III of its U. N. Convention against torture. The techniques used in so-called “enhanced interrogation” clearly involved the use of torture, which is defined as the intentional act of inflicting severe pain without killing the suspect, for the sole purpose of extracting information or force them to do or say something; it can be physical or psychological. C. Benefits of the Patriot Act The Patriot Act may be one of the most controversial measures passed by the Congress. In the hope of making the nation more secure, it can be said, with some degree of caveat, some of the American citizens are willing to trade some of their constitutional rights in exchange for a degree of comfort or safety. The many expanded powers granted to law and immigration agents enabled them to prevent several terror attacks, either from within or without. If America was the epitome of what an open society is, that had changed forever because it now has shades of gray in it when previously, it was all “sunshine” to denote something that is truly wide open. This particular Act made Americans more aware of their rights also, although it may in the process made them more paranoid. They are now suspicious when before, these same people were very open, kind, and friendly towards immigrants. America is seen as a safe haven for the people of the world who had suffered persecution in their home countries, and fully expecting a welcoming America where they can hope for a better life. The openness of American society is probably gone forever, because Americans are no longer that very trusting of their neighbors. In a certain perverse, anyone could become a terror suspect by mere appearance or skin color. The terror attacks and the subsequent passage of the Patriot Act made Americans more security conscious. As the old saying goes, “vigilance is the price of freedom” and people are in many ways more vigilant than ever before, because of the continuing threats posed by terrorism. The advantage is always with the terrorists, as the element of surprise is a very powerful tool for them, knowing when and where they will strike precisely, by selecting soft targets or where there are many people around, to maximize the terror effects on the civilian populace to cause panic. D. Criticisms and Complaints The Patriot Act has raised many disturbing questions regarding the methods used to get information, catch suspects, and finally bring them to court. Many civil libertarians are rightly or wrongly concerned with the many intrusive and invasive provisions of this law which had been retained, despite the sunset provisions in the original Act. Privacy rights may have been slightly diminished as a result of these retained provisions, because the fight against terror is a continuing effort. The wide discretionary powers and authorities granted to officials can be subject to abuse or misuse, which had been shown to be the case in the past, despite all the safeguards in place. A particular concern is the Foreign Intelligence Service Act or FISA (Smith & Hung, 2010).. Although admittedly some trade-offs are necessary to protect the many freedoms which the people of America may have taken for granted in the past, these same freedoms are under a constant threat and the only way to counter these threats is a curtailment of some freedoms which the terrorists will also use to their advantage, hence the new restrictions now in place. However, it can be admitted further that it is very hard to draw where the line should be, between freedoms and the right of a state to protect itself and its citizens from those bent on doing it harm. There are no easy answers, as shown by the experience of Spain in its war against its own terrorists. It can be recalled back in 1982 up to 1986, the Spanish police (Guardia Civil) had used terror also against its terrorist enemies, the members of the Basque separatist groups known by its acronym ETA (Euskadi Ta Askatasuna). Terrorism is a form of asymmetrical warfare, and not only individuals and groups of people can be terrorists; even governments can use terror as form of state policy against its perceived enemies, and therefore enjoys a huge advantage. Conclusion The Patriot Act of 2001 is certainly one of the most controversial laws ever passed due to its wide-ranging discretionary powers given to the authorities to fight terrorism and perceived by many people as necessary while its critics see it as a dangerous tool in the wrong hands due to its inherent provisions which intrude into privacy rights and reduction in Constitutional rights of citizens and immigrants. Those who are against the Patriot Act are concerned with its sweeping powers which can easily be abused if people are not very vigilant in guarding their civil liberties. These critics only point out the sunset provisions which had been extended several times, latest of which was on May 26, 2011 signed by President Barack Obama concerning the provisions on roving wiretaps, the so-called library records provision or searches for business records, and last, the “lone wolves” provision which deals with individuals of suspected terrorist-related activities but who are otherwise not linked to any organized terrorist network. These continuing provisions raise concerns and fears about continuing government surveillance, that of the Big Brother. The Act made money laundering much more difficult to perpetrate, which is good. This Patriot Act likewise raised new issues about racial profiling and immigrant bias against peoples from certain regions or of ethnic minorities mistaken for terrorists. The Act itself made American citizens take their freedoms more seriously and no longer just for granted, while critics of the Act see it as a threat to the basic freedoms and rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Terrorism is an idea that cannot be easily defeated with force but should be fought with better ideas, like on the issues of peaceful reforms, greater freedoms, social change, and improved economic equity. References Asian Development Bank (2008). Countering money laundering and the financing of terrorism. Retrieved April 10, 2013 from http://www.adb.org/Documents/Others/OGC-Toolkits/Anti-Money-Laundering/documents/AML-Briefing-Note.pdf Biddle, W. E. (2009). Immigrants rights after 9/11. New York, NY: Infobase Publishing. Department of Homeland Security (2013). History: About the DHS. Retrieved April 09, 2013 from http://www.dhs.gov/about-dhs Kops, D. (2006). Racial profiling. London, UK: Marshall Cavendish Publishing Limited. Miller, R. L. (1996). Drug warriors and their prey: From police power to police state. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group. Smith, S. S. & Hung, L. C. (2010). The Patriot Act: Issues and controversies. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publisher, Limited. Young, S. N. (2009). Civil forfeiture of criminal property: Legal measures for targeting the proceeds of crime. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing. Read More