You are here

FISC Judges Reject Privacy Advocate As Part of Surveillance Reform

John Bates, the former presiding judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, has "warned against a proposal to include in the court's proceedings an outside privacy and civil liberties advocate, who might take positions counter to the government when it seeks permission to collect huge swaths of Internet traffic, email addresses, and phone communications," Foreign Policy reports.

Bates, in consultation with other FISC judges, wrote that "the participation of a privacy advocate is unnecessary--and could prove counterproductive--in the vast majority of FISA matters, which involve the application of a probable cause or other factual standard to case-specific facts and typically implicate the privacy interest of few persons other than the specificed target. Given the nature of FISA proceedings, the participation of an advocate would neither create a truly adversarial process nor constructively assist the courts in assessing the facts, as the advocate would be unable to communicate with the target or conduct an independent investigation," according to a letter sent to U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Instead, the judges suggest that a privacy advocate only be appointed at the discretion of FISC judges and not have independent authority to intervene in cases.