Senator Ron Wyden de l’Oregon, a privacy hawk who has sat on the Senate intelligence committee since September 11, referred At the new provision as “one of the most dramatic and terrifying extensions of the History Government Supervisory Authority”.
According to ACLU and other organizations, declassifying the new types of businesses that can be considered as an ECSP is an essential step to bring clarity to an otherwise nebulous change in federal surveillance practices, according to ACLU and other organizations gathered in its efforts. “Without such fundamental transparency, the law will probably continue to allow surveillance of the radical NSA on domestic soil which threatens the civil freedoms of all Americans,” the groups wrote in their letter to Gabbard this week.
The office of the Director of National Intelligence has not responded to several requests for comments.
In addition to exhorter Gabbard to declare details on the scope of the 702 program, ACLU and others are currently pressing Gabbard to publish information to quantify the number of Americans who have been “accidentally” listened to by their own government. Intelligence officials have long said that it would be “impossible”, because any analysis of electronic listening would imply that the government has access to them without justice, effectively violating the rights of these Americans.
Confidentiality groups, however, indicate that the research published in 2022 of Princeton University, which details a methodology that could effectively solve this problem. “The refusal of the intelligence community to produce the requested estimate undermines confidence and weakens the legitimacy of article 702”, according to the groups.
Gabbard is widely reported To have softened his position against the government’s espionage while working to ensure her new position as director of the country’s intelligence apparatus. During the 116th congress, for example, Gabbard Presentation of legislation This has sought to completely dismantle the program of article 702, which is considered to be the “jewel of the crown” or the collection of American and crucial intelligence to keep an eye on foreign threats abroad, including terrorist organizations and threats of cybersecurity – by exhibiting a much more extreme position than those traditionally held by legislators and civil society organizations reform of monitoring.
While begging this position in January, the newly adopted views of Gabbard have in fact brought it closer and more with traditional reformers. In response to the questions of the American Senate before its confirmation, for example, Gabbard supported the idea of obliging the Federal Bureau of Investigation in order to obtain mandates before accessing the communications of the Americans carried away by the program 702.
Flagles of national security from the former speaker of the Nancy Pelosi Chamber to the former chairman of the Chamber Intelligence Committee, Mike Turner, have long opposed this mandate requirement, because all FBI directors have traditionally have all FBI directors. “This mandate requirement strengthens the [intelligence community] By ensuring that the requests are targeted and justified, “wrote Gabbard in response to questions from the Senate at the end of January.
The program of article 702 was re -authorized last spring, but only for an additional two years. The first discussions on the re -authorization of the program should start again this summer.
Sean Vitka, executive director of Demand Progress, one of the organizations involved in the lobbying effort, notes that Gabbard has a long history of support for civil freedoms and refers to his recent declarations on “encouraging” secret surveillance programs. “The congress must know and the public deserves to know what 702 is for,” says Vitka, “and how many Americans are swept away in this surveillance.”
“Article 702 has been used several times to surveillance without a mandate on the Americans, including journalists, activists and even members of the Congress,” adds Kia Hamadanchy, ACLU’s main policy lawyer. “Declassifying critical information, as well as the provision of expected basic data on the number of American people whose communications are collected under this surveillance are essential stages to increase transparency as the next approach to re -authorization debate.”
