The Patriot Act Impact on Law Enforcement - Research Paper Example

 The Patriot Act Impact on Law Enforcement Abstract After the September 11 attacks, the American government saw it necessary to shield its population from incidences of terrorism. This necessitated for the overhaul of the security systems in place. The measures taken included the amendment of laws, to empower the law enforcement, and intelligence agencies of the country. This was done in order to rid of the barriers that hampered the efforts of the security agencies to prevent terrorism. This was accomplished by the creation of the patriot act, which removed the red tape that was hindering the efforts of the security agencies. Law enforcement is an integral part in ensuring the security of the US public is restored. This is because they are responsible for en forcing the policies recommended to restore the security of the country after this attack. The correction system also plays a crucial role in ensuring the security of a country is maintained. The USA Patriot Act Introduction The security of citizens of a country is high up on the priority list of any nation. This is not any different for the US. After the devastating attacks of September 11, the American government was made to realize that measures needed to be taken to make certain that a repeat of the attacks does not occur on American soil. In order to restore security and treasure that American public of their security, President George W. Bush signed an act into law that would significantly influence the security policies of the country. The patriot act was created in order to ensure that the intelligence community and law enforcement agencies were empowered by law, to combat acts of terror rather that be held back by it. The act reduced the restrictions that affected the intelligence agencies while gathering information on terrorist threats against the US. The act also expanded the mandate of the secretary in the treasury department to have the authority to have power over the financial transactions, mostly those that involved individuals from foreign nationalities, and entities in order to make it difficult for terrorism to be funded within US soil. The act also aimed to strengthen its border security and control immigration to prevent the percolation of terrorists into the country (Bailie, 2012). They empowered the immigration authority to detaining entrants who were suspected of having any link to terrorism. The authorities were also allowed to deport the individuals who could pose a terrorist threat to the country. This provision will ensure that terrorist elements a ridded from the American population ensuring their safety. Law enforcement was also bolstered in that the agencies were also given the discretion to keep in custody and deport terror suspects (Bailie, 2012). In the act, the definition of terrorism is expanded in order to seal any loopholes that may be exploited by the terrorists. This definition was broadened to include domestic terrorism, which was largely overlooked resulting in a comprehensive definition that will ensure the American public is protected by the act from all forms of terrorist acts. The effectiveness and importance of the act was confirmed when the new administration extended the mandate of the act, in order to ensure that the nation is secure from terrorism. The act was passed unanimously with 357 out of a possible 435 members of the house voting for the enacting of the act. In the senate, the situation was similar with 98 members’ accepting the proposal with only one opposing vote. Though a majority of the policy makers passed the bill, it faced opposition because of its authoritarian approach. The public and critics protested the infringements of the act on the rights of the public (Perez, 2009). This necessitated the passing of the reauthorization bill, which facilitated significant changes in the bill, but this was mostly cosmetic since most of the original content of the bill was maintained. This was seen as a deliberate move by the political class to ignore the civil liberties that are entitled to the US citizens. Titles of the Patriot Act The patriot act was enacted to ensure that the security of the American public was assured. Several titles in the act outline the key functions of the patriot act. Enhancing Internal Security against Terrorism On of the fundamentals reasons for creating the patriot act was to ensure that domestic security is improved to counter terrorist acts. In this title, the act gives authority for the security instruments of the country to ensure that the necessary measures are taken to make counterterrorism in the US efficient to be able to protect the population from acts of terror. One of the ways identified to achieve this was to fund the counterterrorism activities adequately. They also include ensuring that the FBI realizes increased funding in order to make its technical support centre is more efficient. To improve the security of the public, the military, in this title, were authorized to offer assistance in situations where the terrorist threat may include weapons that have the capability to cause mass destruction. However, for this intervention to take place, the appeal of the attorney general is needed. The discrimination of Muslims and Arabs in America was also condemned in the act. This was to ensure that American citizens enjoy their rights without prejudice (Minow, 2002). The title put measures in place to make certain that the protection of the American public is enhanced. Surveillance Procedures Surveillance is essential in combating terrorism since it will enable the security department to be alert of the terrorist threats that face the country. This will enable the government to take measures to stop the threats before they can cause devastation to the public. These clandestine procedures will involve internal operations and gather intelligence in foreign nations. It also involves the use of foreign intelligence gathered from their counterparts in various countries on US citizens and the noncitizens alike. The provision facilitated amendments in the intelligence agencies, which included FISA and ECPA. This came through the change in the definition of the mandate of intelligence agencies. The intelligence agencies were given the leeway to gather intelligence since the legal barrier of to use foreign intelligence on citizens of the US and foreign individuals. This was previously difficult with the overlapping mandates of the intelligence agencies and criminal investigations. The act also ensured that the need for the intelligence agencies to prove that the target of the surveillance is a US citizen. This was because the first amendment barred the surveillance of American citizens, since they were protected by the provision. The title also talks on the expansion of the length that FISA can carry out a physical search and surveillance activities. The authorities could also share information in courts with other agencies. In the provision, Wiretapping as a form of surveillance was expanded. This was done so that information could be routed to allow the intelligence agencies to gather information. The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), however, opposed this provision. The act allowed the intelligence agencies to access this information once they have acquired a warrant from any judge of the district court (Reid, 2009). Electronic communication was also included, in the act, in that the disclosure of electronic information to surveillance agents was included in the in the act. The law that was responsible for governing disclosure of customer information by cable companies was altered under this act, to allow the intelligence agent to access such information. In the provision, subpoenas issued to service providers in the internet business, to give detailed information of individuals being investigated as requested by the authorities. In this title, an issue caused controversy in that the FBI wanted to be able to access files that reveal information on the patterns of an individual who were US citizens. This act dubbed as the sneak peak made it possible for the FBI to delay significantly, notifying individuals of the issuance of search warrants (Minow, 2002). The courts, however, found this action to violate the fourth amendment that disallowed unjustifiable searches. Controversy in this title also emanated from the provision, which allowed the agents from the FBI to secretly demand library records of individuals. The agents would request for the records even if one was not implicated in any unlawful activities. Anti-Money-Laundering To Prevent Terrorism Money laundering is one of the methods used to finance terror activities. It is, therefore, crucial that this practice is curbed in order to destabilize terrorist funding thus disabling their activities. This provision aimed to facilitate the prevention of money laundering activities, in the international scale. For this to be achieved, three areas were identified in order to make this process a success. The first step involved the strengthening of the rules that govern banking procedures. This will help in curbing money laundering, which will affect the activities of terrorists. Another step involved the enhancement of communication between the authorities and financial institutions. This will make the combat against laundering more efficient since the relevant bodies will be better informed, in that, they will employ better book keeping practices, and requirements for reporting incidences of money laundering. The third way was to make the penalties for offenders of laws against money laundering harsh in order to discourage individuals from partaking in this activity (Rowan, 2009). The penalties were in some instances quadrupled to have longer sentences. The US treasury was given the prerogative, to formulate the appropriate guidelines and regulations that will make sure that measures are in place, to diminish cases of money laundering. These measures by the treasury will make it easier for law enforcers to identify incidences of money laundering. The authorities will seize the assets of individuals found in participating in money laundering. The treasury can also block merger deals among banking institutions if the institution has a poor history concerning money laundering. In addition, to combat money laundering, the treasury placed restrictions on money accounts and banks in foreign countries in that it was prohibited for shell banks to be affiliated with a bank located in the US and use of certain accounts in these institutions. Financial institutions are expected to take measure to identify the holders of accounts outside the US when the individuals have corresponding accounts in a US bank. The banks should identify the individuals who maintain the accounts and determine the nationality of the person in question. These measures were taken to ensure that banks make it difficult for individuals to launder money. This, however, will not be successful if the officials involved in financial institutions are corrupt. The authorities realized this and put measures to curb corruption from officials. This was done through putting in place stiff penalties in place for those found guilty in this offence. This provision is an integral part of the patriot act since it aims to choke the financial pipeline financing terrorist activities (Rowan, 2009). Border Security I order for a country to secure its internal security, it must ensure that it keeps the threat out of its precincts to make certain the security of its citizens. For this to be a reality, the government should ensure that it sets aside enough funding to secure its borders. This is necessary in combating terrorism, in that, individuals with intentions of carrying out attacks will find it difficult to get into the country ensuring its security. The border security was equipped with equipment that has capabilities of identifying individuals who are on the alert list, in that, they are suspected terrorists or abet in this activity. This is because the technology has made it a possibility to conduct background checks on the individuals moving across the border into US soil. The immigration department has been given authority to detain suspicious individuals. This occurs when the department finds out that the individual is involved in terrorist acts or is a known coconspirator of terrorists. Removing Obstacles to Investigating Terrorism The patriot act was put in place in order to make the efforts of fighting the vice of terrorism much easier. Through the act, the red tape has been removed in order to allow intelligence officers and law enforcement departments to work more efficiently when combating terrorism. Victims and families of victims of terrorism Acts of terrorism have grave consequences on the population. This necessitates putting up measures to ensure that the individuals affected by terrorism are not abandoned. This involves the government providing aid for the victims who survive the ordeals and family members that are dependent go the victims of terrorist acts. This is done to make so that the government does not abandon its citizens in incidences of terrorism. The payments in such cases are expected to be dispersed not later than 30 days after the incident. Increased Information Sharing For Critical Infrastructure Protection The corporation between security agencies will make the fight against terrorism more efficient and will ensure time is saved in apprehending suspects and thwarting terrorism. Provisions are, therefore, made available to facilitate inter agency corporation among the instruments fighting terrorism. Terrorism criminal law In this title, the definition of a terrorist act is altered in order to make the definition more clear. This will establish how the law enforcements deal with the cases of terrorism that may occur. In the definition, terms like domestic terrorism are included in order not to leave out any form of terrorism. This is done in order to avoid any confusion on what is regarded as terrorism and what is not. This will make it possible for the appropriate punishments to be issued for the crimes committed. Improved Intelligence In this title, it is expected that priorities for methods of improving intelligence to be identified. This is to ensure that intelligence of the country is functioning efficiently to combat terrorism. In this provision, the members of the different intelligence bodies are encouraged to work together and foster a healthy relationship that will be mutually beneficial. Controversies Surrounding the Patriot Act The patriot act did was not enacted without opposition. The public and critics alike had some reservation towards the enactment of this act. The main reason was that the act would contravene the liberties of the public. The act was seen to violate privacy rights of citizens with intelligence agencies having the legal right to eavesdrop on the citizens. The provisions that allowed for the arrest and deportation of individuals was seen as a violation of the fundamental rights of the citizens (Abramson and Godoy, 2005). Law enforcement For a community to be fully functional, it crucial that there are arrangements in place to make certain that law is upheld. Without this, the society will live in anarchy and no meaningful development will be realized. Law enforcement agencies are mandated to ensure that the community adheres to the laws and policies set (Terwilliger, 2005). Apart from this, law enforcement agencies are also mandated to stop criminal activity from occurring in the community. They also enforce the warrants and orders from the courts. These are crucial functions in the fight against terrorism. Law enforcement agencies take measures to prevent these acts from taking place and detain the suspects and perpetrators of acts of terrorism. The department is also expected to respond to emergencies to ensure that the public is protected. This ensures that the public’s safety is protected from the threat of terrorism. Law enforcement is the tool used by the government to ensure that the patriot act is enforced, and that public safety is ensured. Law enforcement agencies are essential, since even if a country has the best policies and laws, they will be ineffective if there is no arrangement in place to enforce them. The patriot act has made headway in the prevention of terrorist acts in the US. This is a possibility due to the corporation between all the security departments including law enforcement. The Concept of Net Widening Net widening refers to a restorative justice system, which ensures that the cases that would not have been tried in court are received by the alternative system created by widening the social net. This can also be done by utilizing the sanctions not employed by the formal justice structure. This system was created in order to burdening the courts with cases that could be solved using alternative methods (Prichard, 2010). This result in, petty offenders instead of being convicted in courts they are taken to programs that encourage reformation. This, however, can have a negative effect in the justice system since net widening may be used to deny suspects the rights accorded to individuals in the justice system. Law enforcers may use this method in order to detain a suspect on their own terms. Petty offenders may also not be reformed since they will take the process for granted in that they will be released without being taken to court (Prichard, 2010). Conclusion Terrorist activities are a real threat to the American society. The devastating effects of the 9-11 attacks confirmed this. This necessitated the drastic measures taken by the American policy makers and recommendations and changes adopted by the intelligence and law enforcement agencies in the country. This led to the creation of the patriot act to ensure that the security of the country is restored. This would have been impossible if the law enforcement agencies were not involved in the process. It is crucial for the security of a country that the systems set in place to ensure the security of the country is maintained to work in conjunction to ensure that this is realized. References Abramson., L and Godoy, M. (2005). The Patriot Act: Key Controversies. Npr. Retrieved 5 June 2012, from: < http://www.npr.org/news/specials/patriotact/patriotactdeal.html> Bailie, J. (2012). The constitutionality of the patriot Act: Examining Section 213. Student Pulse online academic student journal, 4 (03). Retrieved 5 June 2012, from: Minow, M. (2002). The USA patriot act. Library journal. Retrieved 5 June 2012, from: Perez, E. (2009). Patriot Act Redo Clears Split Panel. The wall street journal. Politics. Retrieved 5 June 2012, from: Prichard, J. (2010). Net-Widening and the Diversion of Young People From Court: A Longitudinal Analysis With Implications for Restorative Justice. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 43(1):112-129. Retrieved 5 June 2012, from: Rowan B. D. (2009) "Section 311 Patriot Act: Is America using this legislation more as a means of cementing her extraterritorial reach than as a legitimate method of preventing money laundering?” Journal of Money Laundering Control, 12 (3): 299 – 314. Retrieved 5 June 2012, from: Reid, M.M. (2009). The USA PATRIOT Act and academic libraries. American libraries associations: College & Research Libraries News. vol. 70 no. 11 646-650. < http://crln.acrl.org/content/70/11/646.full> Terwilliger, G. (2005). The War on Terrorism: Law Enforcement or National Security? The Federalist Society; for Law and public Policy studies. Retrieved 5 June 2012, from: Read More