Decius wrote:
This is an important development. One of the things that information systems can do is make law enforcement perfect in certain contexts. Many laws are written with the assumption of imperfect enforcement.

Agreed... this is very dangerous, I think.

Eventually, the fact that this information is being shared with all sorts of countries may result in a U.S. Citizen facing a bigger hassle from a foreign government than visa denial because that government has access to this data, and different legal standards. Canada may bar you for a pot conviction, but most South East Asian countries execute people for pot possession. A xenophobic moral panic in such a country might result in a records check of all expats, who might be repunished there for crimes they had been convicted of elsewhere.

Which is one of the major reasons I'll never go to a lot of those countries. The line between life and death is too fine.

-k

Decius wrote:
Eventually, the fact that this information is being shared with all sorts of countries may result in a U.S. Citizen facing a bigger hassle from a foreign government than visa denial because that government has access to this data, and different legal standards. Canada may bar you for a pot conviction, but most South East Asian countries execute people for pot possession. A xenophobic moral panic in such a country might result in a records check of all expats, who might be repunished there for crimes they had been convicted of elsewhere.

This happened to me. On my 5th visit to Canada, I was turned away at Vancouver International Airport. The offense was a minor misdemeanor, nearly 5 years old, and did not involve narcotics. They didn't care. My mother and brother were waiting to meet me in Vancouver. They escorted me to the next flight out. It wasn't literally a deportation, since I was just denied entry and left voluntarily. If I hadn't agreed to it though, they would have deported me.

Any time I enter Canada, I have to get a criminal waiver. This takes at least 60 days, and is $200 CDN. The first trip there nobody stopped me. The second they stopped me, made me pay for a criminal waiver at the border. This was shocking at the time. I hadn't been made to feel like a criminal before. It did not feel good. They asked me if I had a criminal record and I said no. I thought I was telling the truth. They can't ask you about misdemeanors in American job interviews, right? So I thought that did not count. She asked me if I was sure. I fessed up to the misdemeanor. "Sir, Canada doesn't distinguish between misdemeanors and felonies," I was told. She had all details of the case and sentencing there on her computer, and actually argued with me because I called part of the sentence, the community service, something different than the official name. I thought she was rude at the time, but in retrospect she was a real sweetheart compared to some there.

The third trip I was left alone. The fourth trip there I was on the way home from India on relatively short notice, so I did not obtain a waiver. I figured I would just skip the visit and get denied entry and go home if they objected. They thoroughly searched me, and let me in.

The fifth trip, they stopped me. They denied me entry. Again, I didn't have 60 days notice on the trip, so I could not apply ahead of time. Its not often that I travel that I have 60 days notice, period. The guy at customs was determined to not let me in. He really, really did not like me.

They also interrogated and humiliated an Iranian woman who was carrying Iranian visa applications on behalf of a European Canadian embassy. They kept yelling at her that they could deny her entry and send the Visas to the Iranian embassy and get all the applicants jailed, tortured or killed, until they had her in tears. Then they go back and chec... [ Read More (0.3k in body) ]

Decius wrote:

Welcome to the new world of border security. Unsuspecting Americans are turning up at the Canadian border expecting clear sailing, only to find that their past -- sometimes their distant past -- is suddenly an issue.

Canadian attorney David Lesperance, an expert on customs and immigration, says he had a client who was involved in a fraternity prank 20 years ago. He was on a scavenger hunt, and the assignment was to steal something from a Piggly Wiggly supermarket. He got caught, paid a small fine and was ordered to sweep the police station parking lot.
He thought it was all forgotten. And it was, until he tried to cross the border.

The official word from the Canadian Border Services Agency is that this is nothing more than business as usual.

But what has changed is the way the information is gathered. In the wake of 9/11, Canada and the United States formed a partnership that has dramatically increased what Lesperance calls "the data mining'' system at the border.

The Smart Border Action Plan, as it is known, combines Canadian intelligence with extensive U.S. Homeland Security information. The partnership began in 2002, but it wasn't until recently that the system was refined.

"They can call up anything that your state trooper in Iowa can,'' Lesperance says. "As Canadians and Americans have begun cooperating, all those indiscretions from the '60s are going to come back and haunt us.''

This is an important development. One of the things that information systems can do is make law enforcement perfect in certain contexts. Many laws are written with the assumption of imperfect enforcement. I'm sure that the people who originally crafted rules baring "convicts" from crossing borders knew that the data usually wouldn't be available. Its a convenient excuse that they can use to bar people if they need a way to bar them and they happen to have looked into them.

With this sort of information now at their disposal, the regulation takes on an entirely different tone. Anyone convicted of any minor offense is now barred from International travel without engaging in an involved paperwork process. This was not the intent of these laws, but modern legislatures are unlikely to act to resolve the situation unless they are the subject of significant pressure. Unfortunately, that pressure needs to start in the United States, which has been ratcheting up the requirements and the information sharing. The xenophobia and 9/11 skittishness here probably makes that an uphill battle.

Eventually, the fact that this information is being shared with all sorts of countries may result in a U.S. Citizen facing a bigger hassle from a foreign government than visa denial because that government has access to this data, and different legal standards. Canada may bar you for a pot conviction, but most South East Asian countries execute people for pot possession. A xenophobic moral panic in such a country might result in a records check of all expats, who might be repunished there for crimes they had been convicted of elsewhere.

But this is exactly where things are headed. The future will be definied by more and more data liquidity. Not only within countries (witness the UK) but inter-country. This will be driven by the desire to create peace and security and drive transparency within certain contexts (ie. health care), but I suspect that just like everything else, it will be abused. There will be massive protests and entire sub-cultures which will resist it, but I fear it will be ubiquitous. Terry Gilliam will be laughing.