On August 21–22, 2014, the American Bar Association, Section of Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice hosted the
Ninth Annual Homeland Security Institute in Washington, D.C. The Institute included panels on a wide
variety of issues including immigration, border security, the Foreign Corrupt
Practices Act, the SAFETY Act, government contracting, and the DHS priorities
for the upcoming years. No post can
possibly do justice to the myriad topics discussed. Instead, this two-part piece will attempt to
1) set out several major themes of the Institute and 2) focus on issues in
immigration law.
Part One
An area of emphasis for numerous speakers at the Institute was
the role of technology in national security.
This post will provide an overview of some of the benefits and issues
flagged by the panelists that come with the advent of increasingly sophisticated
technology. These reflections come from
the following presentations: Law Enforcement Agenda 2014; The Foreign Corrupt
Practices Act: Doing Business Internationally; Support Anti-Terrorism by
Fostering Effective Technology (SAFETY) Act; and DHS General Counsel’s Office:
New Technology and Homeland Security. A
copy of the full agenda is here.
Importance
of Information Sharing
Partnership and coordination are essential to effective law
enforcement and improved national security.
Not only can such sharing increase efficiency of operations, but it can
also lead to more successful operations.
For instance, the U.S. Customs & Border Patrol (CBP) relies heavily
on the procurement of advanced information from airlines and other domestic and
international agencies to identify travelers who pose national security risks. If this information on travelers can be
obtained and evaluated early, the travelers who require further clearance can
be notified before boarding airplanes or arriving in the United States to only
then be turned away. With over 360
million travelers each year, or roughly one million per day, identifying the
risks before travel occurs greatly reduces security risks and improves
efficiency for all involved parties and agencies.
Additionally, in the context of criminal prosecutions, international
coordination can greatly improve the chances of successful investigations. For example, in one instance, a photo found
in Boston was shared with state and international agencies, and ultimately led
to the discovery of a child abuser in the Netherlands. Information from the international
investigation also led to the identification of a criminal partner in
Massachusetts.
The
Rise of Big Data and Improved Agency/Entity Performance
An improved ability to collect information and generate
statistics is an increasingly important tool for both agencies and entities
subject to regulation. First, data
collection can help agencies identify areas where their procedures could be
improved and identify shortfalls in the office. For instance, CBP offices are gathering data
to assess the workload of their agents and determine how many staffers are
required. According to John Wagner, the
Acting Assistant Commissioner in the Office of Field Operations, to function most
effectively, the CBP requires nearly 4,700 additional officers.
Further, collection of data may help agencies identify whether substantives
policies should be reconsidered. For
example, during one panel it was suggested that there might be a link between
the United States’ policy of deporting alien felons and subsequent problems of
human smuggling and trafficking. In
order to look more deeply into this and other law enforcement issues, the
United States is working with nations including Honduras to collect and share information. While it is too early to say what the data
will show, collecting it is the first step toward making the requisite assessment.
Shifts in how agencies share information can also change larger
trends in law enforcement and the way in which entities and individuals should
consider and respond to liability risks.
For example, since the early 2000s, use of the Foreign Corrupt Practices
Act (FCPA) has dramatically increased.
In part, this is due to agencies making this an enforcement
priority. However, as agencies have
increased their ability to gather information and emphasized coordination, FCPA
charges are often no longer brought alone but in the context of larger
investigations (e.g. antitrust). Additionally,
because the agencies have more recently named senior executives in addition to
the companies, the liability risks for the entities and individuals have greatly
increased. Thus, it becomes all the more
important for companies to work with counsel early to develop monitoring plans and
to consider making early disclosures as a show of good faith in order to
mitigate the chances of or extent of liability.
Increased
Cybersecurity Risks
Undoubtedly, improved technology helps law enforcement officials
carry out their duties effectively and efficiently. Enhanced technology, however, is not given
solely to law enforcement but to the public at large, which increases the
chance that individuals wishing to carry out cybercrimes will be successful. As one panelist pointed out, an anti-malware program
is often effective only once and has an average life span of one week because
it is so easy and inexpensive to create new malware. There is no easy resolution for this security
threat, but panelists highlighted two main points. First, all entities should have and continue
to update their detection systems to both prevent security breaches and to respond
quickly to breaches that do occur. One
resource available to entities is the best practices for security management
guides published by the DHS. Second, larger
entities should be aware of the Support Anti-Terrorism by Fostering Effective
Technologies Act (SAFETY Act). This Act
provides liability protection for entities that fall victim to physical or
cyberterrorist attacks.
No comments:
Post a Comment