Full-Body Scan Or Pat-Down?

Some airports in the U.S. are now using Automated Imaging Technology or AIT. Also called full-body scanner, it is here where passengers have to go through before boarding. In addition to the usual pat-down, the use of this device spares passengers from “body contact” with the airport security officer. Some argue that AIT is “better” compared with the pat-down, but privacy advocate groups think otherwise.

An advocacy group approached the Washington Court of Appeals judges. They object to how the technology invades the privacy of passengers. They called the use of full-body scanners as “unreasonable search” and in violation of a passenger’s civil rights. These machines are now being used as first line of defense at some airport security checkpoints.

A passenger’s naked image is shown as he or she passes through the machine. This is the main point of objection of the group. They imply that while passengers are spared from body contact, they are subjected to a more invasive technology. The EPIC considers the policy “in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution”. Aside from the foregoing, it also violates “laws protecting privacy and religious freedom”.

The government in defense of the use of this new technology responded that systems are in place to protect the privacy of passengers. It explained that passengers’ identity is never shown to the “viewers” who are generally agents at airports. Government says this makes the search reasonable and “minimally invasive”. However, the truth to this contention is yet to be ascertained.

EPIC has also advised the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to postpone the use of such technology. According to TSA, almost 98 percent of passengers go through full-body scanning without any problem. Only about 2 percent of passengers would choose pat-down instead. Atty. Marc Rotenberg of EPIC said it is likely that passengers do not know that they still have the pat-down as their option.

Even the judges themselves also expressed apprehension on the way TSA has been given the power to use the technology. One is the effect of the body scanner on individual passengers. It is possible that it is too late to discover its damaging effects on passengers. There should have been public consultation for inputs before it went into primary use. Its use should only be selective especially when the level of security threat is too low to warrant.

Image courtesy of:

Image: luigi diamanti / FreeDigitalPhotos.net