OLYMPIA — A bill that would broaden the power of state law enforcement to secretly tap telephone lines is under fire from opponents who say the proposal is a violation of the right to privacy.
The bill is part of an anti-terrorism package proposed by Gov. Gary Locke and Attorney General Christine Gregoire following the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11.
The proposal allows for information obtained through a court-approved wiretap to be used in state court, a provision not permitted under current law. It also authorizes use of a wiretap before a judge approves it if one person involved in the conversation consents.
The bill also clarifies that eavesdropping devices can be used to collect e-mail addresses from electronic messages and allows testimony from federal officers in state court on evidence gathered through a federal investigation.
Current law does not allow such testimony if the information was collected under more permissive federal surveillance laws.
During a joint House committee hearing Wednesday evening, opponents with the Washington Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers argued that the bill threatens the privacy rights of innocent people whose conversations might be monitored.
"This begs the question of whether or not we are going to inadvertently catch the good guys," Kristine Costello, an association spokeswoman, told a joint meeting of the House Select Committee on Community Security and the House Judiciary Committee.
"Are innocent people going to be caught up in the web of this invasion of privacy?" she asked.
State Rep. Tom Campbell, R-Spanaway, expressed concern that the bill allows local law enforcement to "operate in an environment of espionage and terrorism."
"We are looking to create many FBIs and many CIAs in our police department," Campbell said. "I don’t like that."
As it stands, the bill is unconstitutional and has inadequate safeguards against intrusions on innocent citizens, Campbell said.
"We’ve got a strong tradition in this state of civil liberties, and I certainly don’t want to infringe on that," he said. "If we enacted the bill as it is now, we would be headed for some serious problems."
The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Christopher Hurst, D-Enumclaw, said the proposal brings state law into compliance with federal law and would allow the state to prosecute terrorists using federal wiretap evidence if the federal government did not prosecute.
He stressed that the bill would only apply to acts of terrorism and that it is not an attempt to tap large numbers of citizens, but a preventative measure to protect people from terrorist attacks.
Hurst said he would "much rather have us in a place where we are prosecuting a person for attempting to commit an act of terrorism" rather than cleaning up damage after terrorism has occurred.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.