It’s Hobson’s choice: be revealed near-naked on screen in front of strangers, or be subjected to a prying patdown that doesn’t miss an inch or a crevice. Here is some US background, and a CLA media statement on the issue.
Media inquiry: Airport scanners
Airport scanners and privacy
November 2010
BACKGROUND:
Pilots in the US have been warned by the boss of the world’s largest independent pilot’s union the Allied Pilots Association to avoid the full-body scanners due to fears over increased radiation, and instead to submit to pat-down searches. However there is concern about these searches, which have been changed recently to be more invasive and use a sliding hand movement across the genitals. Following the warning to pilots about the scanners, where does this leave members of the public? Should they go through these full-body scanners and risk potentially damaging their health and invading their privacy, or opt for the pat-down searches – which may be equally or even more invasive.
As these body scanners are being rolled out across more countries, and are apparently going to be at our airport next year, at the same time the airport searches are becoming more invasive at airports around the US. What is the traveller to do – what’s the better option, if any? Should they be concerned about these new security measures? Should they be forced to choose between their health and their privacy?
Link to the APA’s warning: http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/11/apa-president-advises-against.html
Of interest is the president’s quote: “There is absolutely no denying that the enhanced pat-down is a demeaning experience” yet he’s still recommending that it’s better to undergo this kind of search than to take the risk of the radiation from the body scanners.
Links to other US people complaining about their treatment at airports:
CLA response
Civil Liberties Australia (CLA) is extremely concerned by the disregard shown by the US Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to the privacy and dignity of travellers by subjecting them to invasive body searches.
"What we see here is a government agency mad with power," said Tim Vines, media spokesperson for CLA.
"People want to feel safe and secure when flying, and that includes feeling safe from the wandering hands of transport officials. The actions of the US TSA would amount to indecent assault if performed byanyone else in the community."
Travellers can avoid being patted down in public by submitting to a controversial full-body x-ray scan, which CLA has criticized for it’s potential to create a detailed, naked 3D image of the individual.
Refusal to allow a transport official to ogle your body will result in an official prodding, poking and probing your body in full view of the public.
Travellers expect some inconveniences at airports but it must be proportionate and justified.
"The punishment for opting-out of an invasion of your privacy is an even greater invasion of your bodily integrity," said Mr Vines. "Until the TSA reveals why it believes these new, intrusive searches are necessary, they should desist.
“Australian authorities should take heed of the backlash in the USA, and avoid violating people’s bodily privacy at airports.”
Tim Vines, Director
National Media Spokesperson
Civil Liberties Australia