0908_Complete_rev8:Layout 1 10/08/2009 14:41 Page 13
No-Fly Lists
Ever since the attacks of September
11, 2001, that portion of the public that “....across the U.S.,
travels via commercial air has been
subject to significant restrictions on their countless travellers are
movements. Paramount among these
limitations is the utilisation of data; detained, questioned
“lists”, as they are often referred to, to
determine if selected individuals are by law enforcement
attempting to travel into or out of
participating States on commercial authorities, and denied
aircraft. If they are, and a “match” is
made, those persons are either required boarding due to their
to undergo enhanced screening
measures or denied permission to fly. names, or similar ones,
Ranging from lists mandated through
Presidential Directive to various private- appearing on the no-fly
public sector partnership models, these
data banks have generated their fair list. They are never
share of comment, controversy and civil
liberty issues. Robert Raffel examines told how they got onto
the background, present use and future Senator Edward Kennedy, one of the most
plans surrounding these lists in an recognisable faces in the US, found himself the list, and in fact, are
attempt to address the question of their a “victim” of the “No Fly” list.
relative usefulness, and why they are never told they’re on it,
being used at all. Are they, as the
government states, utilised “To names being added to the lists. until they attempt to
strengthen the ability of the United According to various reports, by the time
States Government to protect the people, the TSA took receipt of the list, it had travel by air. And they
property, and territory of the United reportedly grown to over 400 names.
States against acts of terrorism…” ? Or, The No-Fly list was eventually bifurcated can’t get off...”
are they really another meaningless into two parts; one comprising
effort, like the “National Threat individuals “…determined to pose a Air Canada flight to Calgary. Instead of
Advisory”, to give the appearance of direct threat to U.S. civil aviation” (i.e., being issued a boarding pass, Ms. Hutton
purposeful activity on the part of those the “no fly” list), and another “selectee” was told to stand aside, and “…just stand
whose job it is to protect us? Is the list, which requires the passenger to there.” As it turned out, Ms. Hutton’s
emperor wearing any clothes? undergo enhanced screening in order to name was “…on a list.” Glenda was a 66-
be permitted aboard the aircraft. By year old retiree from the Vancouver
he “No Fly List”, sometimes March of 2006, CBS News, investigating Island school system. Her husband was
T
referred to as the terrorist a series of complaints regarding a 25-year veteran of the Canadian
watch list, is a list of names administration and utilisation of the no- military. They had both been looking
compiled and managed by fly project, obtained a copy of the most forward to retirement as an opportunity
the United States recent list, which had grown to 44,000 to travel. But she couldn’t get on board
Government. It is names. The pre-screening is currently the plane.
essentially a compilation of lists that had administered by the individual airlines, Thus began a two-year, $2,000 out-of-
been maintained by various agencies but steps are underway to transfer this pocket quest to have her name cleared
that existed prior to the attacks of responsibility to the TSA. off of an international no-fly list. The
September 11, 2001. Prior to that date, The numbers only tell part of this story. Royal Canadian Mounted Police,
no one agency was “…charged with In hundreds of airports each day across Canada’s equivalent of the FBI,
consolidating it and making it available the U.S., countless travellers are attempted to assist by issuing her papers
for use in terrorist screening”. At that detained, questioned by law enforcement containing her fingerprints, which would
time, the FBI list was reported to contain authorities, and denied boarding due to help in establishing her identity.
the names of 16 people. In November of their names, or similar ones, appearing Interestingly, though, the RCMP advised
2001, responsibility for maintaining the on the no-fly list. They are never told how Ms. Hutton that they couldn’t find out
list was transferred to the Federal they got onto the list, and in fact, are what list she was on, or how to have her
Aviation Administration, with the never told they’re on it, until they attempt name removed. A representative from
Transportation Security Administration to travel by air. And they can’t get off. Passport Canada advised that Ms.
(TSA) assuming full administrative The below case study is illustrative of the Hutton’s delays were not “…related to
responsibility. The list is currently issues surrounding this effort: your passport” (read: it’s not our
managed by the TSA’s Transportation In October of 2007, Glenda Hutton and problem). Transport Canada, in an
Security Intelligence.Service (TSIS), her husband Ken, of Courtenay, British unsigned email, also helpfully advised
which serves as a clearinghouse for Columbia, attempted check to board an that “We concluded that this issue was
Aviationsecurityinternational August 2009 www.asi-mag.com 13
Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54