今天在佛蒙特州，亚利桑那州，北卡罗来纳州，纽约州，威斯康星州，马里兰州和许多其他国家，美国人以投票方式使这个伟大的民主工作。该委员会今天开会作为其在民主进程中的作用的一部分，专注于重要的一个监督，但至少明白，我们的政府职能。In particular, we are examining how the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is working � not in theory, but in practice.
我们已经开始对我们的监督听证会在去年夏天就参议院多数移动。9月11日的恐怖袭击后，我们针对的是什么成为了美国爱国者法案加快研究，提供法律工具和资源，以更好地保护我们国家的安全。我们将继续努力，以确保法律得到有效并能与维护宪法规定的自由相一致的方式实施。
我们大部分的焦点将在今天的进程问题在一个秘密的系统。金博宝正规网址在根据法律面前人人平等的国家，过程是非常重要的。在一个国家，其宪法是我们的自由的堡垒，过程是必不可少的。而在施用理所当然要搞得神神秘秘的下运行的系统，过程是至关重要的。
FISA�S ROLE
该USA PATRIOT Act made important changes to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which is called �FISA� for short. This law set up a secret court to review government applications to conduct secret wiretaps and searches inside the United States for the purpose of collecting foreign intelligence information to help protect this nation�s national security. FISA was originally enacted in the 1970s to curb widespread abuses by Presidents and former FBI officials of bugging and wiretapping Americans without any judicial warrant � based on the Executive Branch�s unilateral determination that national security justified the surveillance. The targets of those wiretaps included a Member and staff of the United States Congress, White House domestic affairs advisors, journalists and many individuals and organizations engaged in no criminal activity but, like Dr. Martin Luther King, who expressed political views threatening to those in power. Indeed, on our panel today is one of the victims of those abuses, Dr. Mort Halperin, whose telephone was illegally tapped by high-level officials in the Nixon Administration. I point that out because we need to remind ourselves that these abuses were not ancient history.
监督的秘密系统的
在美国爱国者法案，我们试图让FISA保护我们的国家安全构成了更有效的工具，但在过去的虐待行为都太新鲜简单地屈从于行政部门不受约束的自由裁量权，以确定这些变化的范围。此次抽查和监督以及如何将这些新的力量正在推敲的平衡是不可缺少的。秘密系统的监督是特别困难的，但在一个民主国家，也尤为重要。
在过去的二十年里主要是在秘密发生了FISA过程。显然，具体调查必须保密，但即使对FISA过程中的基本事实已经到耐日光。解释FISA法律已经发展很大程度上闭门造车。谁准备FISA应用司法部和FBI工作人员闭门造车。当FISA过程命中碰壁，如在紧接年9·11事件之前，该的FISA监控应用和订单处理产生不利影响，国会的监督委员会应在9月11日之后发现了很多比夏天快攻击。即使在FISA监控最普遍的信息，包括如何经常FISA监控目标美国公民，或多久FISA监控是在刑事案件中使用，是默默无闻。在国家安全问题上，我们必须给行政部门需要做的工作电源。但是，我们也必须有其性能公众监督。When the Founding Fathers said �if men were all angels, we would need no laws,� they did not mean secret laws.
一个新的窗口上的FISA过程
Our oversight has already contributed to the public�s understanding of this process, by bringing to lightthe FISA court�s unanimous opinionrejecting the Justice Department�s interpretation of the USA PATRIOT Act�s amendments. If it had not been for the prolonged efforts of this committee, especially Senator Specter and Senator Grassley, one of the most important legal opinions in the last 20 years of national security law � even though it was unclassified � would have remained totally in secret. As it is, this unclassified opinion was issued in May, but not released until three months later, on August 20, in response to信参议员斯佩克特参议员格拉斯利和我送向法院起诉。该May 17 opinion is the first window opened to the public and the Congress about today�s FISA and about how the changes authorized by the USA PATRIOT Act are being used. Without this pressure to see the opinion, the Senators who wrote and voted on the very law in dispute would not have known how the Justice Department and the FISA court were interpreting it. The glimpses offered by this unclassified opinion raise policy, process and constitutional issues about implementation of the new law.
该第一次呼吁审查的FISA法庭，其中美国的检察长昨日指出，被转录，昨天，与参议员斯佩克特参议员格拉斯利，我发了一封信，要求法院提供口头辩论的非保密文本及其对这个委员会的决定。我们需要知道如何该法被解释和适用。
DOJ�S HANDLING OF THE USA PATRIOT ACT
因为很多的FISA规定，须经夕阳，这是该委员会监控司法部是如何解释他们尤为重要。该Department of Justice�s brief makes two sweeping claims regarding the USA PATRIOT Act amendments. First, the Department boldly claims that the longstanding definition of �foreign intelligence� adopted by numerous courts for more than 20 years is simply wrong. Specifically, it claims that the notion that domestic criminal prosecution is separate from foreign intelligence is not valid. Instead, DOJ argues that information obtained for criminal prosecution is now just one type of foreign intelligence information. Therefore, they claim that using FISA for the sole purpose of pursuing a criminal prosecution, as opposed to collecting intelligence, is allowed.
Second, the Department argues that changing the FISA test from requiring �the purpose�of collecting foreign intelligence to a �significant purpose� allows the use of FISA by prosecutors as a tool for a case even when they know from the outset that case will be criminally prosecuted. They claim that criminal prosecutors can now initiate and direct secret FISA wiretaps -- without normal probable cause requirements and discovery protections � as another tool in criminal investigations when the strictures of Title III or the Fourth Amendment cannot be met. In short, the Department is arguing that the normal rules for Title III and criminal search warrants no longer apply in terrorism or espionage cases even for U.S. persons.
I was surprised to learn that, as the �drafter of the coordination amendment� in the USA PATRIOT Act (See Brief at 41) the Department cites my statement to support its arguments that there is no longer a distinction between using FISA for a criminal prosecution and using it to collect foreign intelligence. That was not and is not my belief. We sought to amend FISA to make it a better foreign intelligence tool. But it was not the intent of these amendments to fundamentally change FISA from a foreign intelligence tool into a criminal law enforcement tool. We all wanted to improve coordination between the criminal prosecutors and intelligence officers, but we did not intend to obliterate the distinction between the two, and we did not do so. Indeed, to make such a sweeping change in FISA would have required changes in far more parts of the statute than were affected by the USA PATRIOT Act.
此外，由于银行教授在他的证词中指出，这种变化会呈现严重的宪法担忧。即使是FISA颁布之前，法院依赖外国情报收集的非检察宗旨，以允许进行的美国外国势力和代理监督行政部门的余地。其理由是，当真正的外国情报机构的努力参与，普通法院缺乏专业知识，保密，并保护我们国家安全的敏捷性。But courts have always been careful to point out that � unlike traditional intelligence activity � when the actual purpose of wiretap is a normal criminal prosecution even for a serious terrorist crime, that our normal courts were fully competent to handle such matters. In addition, in criminal cases the Fourth Amendment�s protections of privacy regain prominence. It creates serious constitutional issues for the DOJ to claim, as it does in its brief, that all these courts are incorrect and that the Department of Justice can use FISA to sidestep the Fourth Amendment�s normal probable normal requirements in matters that they know from the outset are going to be normal criminal prosecutions. I am interested to hear the views of our expert panelists on the Justice Department�s sweeping arguments.
MAKING FISA工作，因为它应该
与FIS金博宝正规网址A执行的问题，不只是法律问题，但是。我们的委员会还举行了公开会议和简报，以及我们从许多负责处理和审批FISA应用联邦调查局和司法部官员听到。虽然我不能详细的这一疏忽在未分类论坛的结果，我必须要说的是：9-11袭击发生前，我们发现FISA过程被不必要的中间绑和效率低下百出。一些低效率的曾与我们在美国爱国者法案涉及的法律问题做的，但许多没有。金博宝正规网址该y related to the same problems that this committee has seen time and time again at the FBI � poor communication, inadequate training, a turf mentality, and an obsession with covering up mistakes instead of addressing them head on. Even a cursory read of the unanimous FISA Court opinion bears that out. The FISC was not frustrated with the state of the law. Instead all seven federal judges were concerned about a track record marred by a series of inaccurate affidavits that even caused them to take the extraordinary step of banning an agent from appearing before the court in the future. The problems they cite were evident in the previous administration as well as the current administration. I continue to support Director Mueller�s efforts to address these problems, but the going will not be easy.
当我们进行这项广泛的疏忽，我更加相信，没有灵丹妙药来解决这些问题。这是很有诱惑力的建议FISA法令对具体案件作出回应进一步削弱，但事实是，越是困难的系统性问题，必须妥善予以解决，以有效地打击恐怖主义。此外，由于FISA过程的保密性和与FISA的法律，这是不可能智能解决确实存在的问题，而不用担心做更多的伤害那么好。As this week�s mostly secret appeal before the FISA review court demonstrates, the consequences of amending that statute can be far reaching and perhaps unintended. FISA was enacted for a reason. FISA is even more important to the nation today than it was a year ago, before September 11, and we need it to work well. It ensures that our domestic surveillance is aimed at true national security targets and does not simply serve as an excuse to violate the constitutional rights of our own citizens. We must first exercise the utmost care and diligence in understanding and overseeing its use. Only then can we act in the nation�s best interest.
## ###
|
