|
Security lapses exposed
Airport security is failing to deter the terrorist
Chris Yates
COMPROMISED SECURITY CAN HAVE devastating results. This was revealed
all too clearly at the end of 1999 when hijackers smuggled weaponry aboard an
Indian Airlines flight from Kathmandu Airport in Nepal to Delhi in India. The
hijackers held the plane, its passengers and crew for seven days before the
Indian government capitulated to their demands. Only weeks later, the Ariana
flight from Kabul to Kandahar was hijacked and flown to London Stansted, where
the hostages were freed and many of the flight's occupants claimed asylum.
It appears in both cases the hijackers simply carried their weapons through
screening checkpoints unchallenged. Airport security experts say that such
incidents serve to illustrate how poor passenger and hand baggage screening is
at some airports, and that unless steps are taken to bolster the checks in place
at all airports, other security measures are futile.
In the US, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has started to address
the issue, and is seeking powers to vet the growing number of independent
security firms being hired to provide security services at American airports.
The FAA admits that in tests it has been found that screening personnel in
Europe are "able to detect twice as many test objects as their counterparts in
the United States." It suggests that this is because European security personnel
are much better trained, have more experience and are higher paid.
"The airport security screeners play a crucial role in protecting the flying
public," says FAA Administrator Jane Garvey. "This rulemaking will give us the
tools we need to regulate screening companies and make sure screeners meet our
rigorous standards for detecting dangerous objects and keeping those objects
from being brought on board passenger planes."
The FAA initiative is being driven, at least in part, by a perception that in
the constant drive to cut costs, passengers are being put at risk by carriers
hiring so called "bargain bucket" firms to provide security services. This has
led to several high profile instances of security screeners being employed with
little or no training at minimum wage. According to the FAA, the average pay for
screeners is US$5.75 per hour and some screeners do not receive fringe benefits.
Turnover rates exceed 100% in many locations.
The proposed regulation would make screening companies accountable, along
with air carriers, for screener performance and screener training. The FAA
believes this would encourage firms hired by the airlines to employ qualified
staff and train them effectively.
Security at US airports has been shown to be less than effective on several
occasions. It was discovered in June last year that despite the FAA having spent
in excess of US$100 million a year for the past three years on high tech
solutions to the security conundrum, inspectors from the Department of
Transportation (DOT) Office of the Inspector General (OIG) had successfully
penetrated the major airports' security infrastructure many times unchallenged
and been able to board parked aircraft.
Further evidence of lax standards came in August when a sting operation by
the US Customs Service resulted in 56 employees of American Airlines and
Lufthansa Sky Chef being arrested and indicted on charges of smuggling cocaine,
hand grenades and other weaponry in passenger flights through Miami
International Airport. US Customs Commissioner Raymond Kelly said, "This is
about more than shutting off a major drug conduit to the United States. It's
about protecting passengers from the risks of aircraft that have been tampered
with and travel facilities in which security has been compromised."
The customs chief said the investigation had revealed a catalogue of security
lapses. The weaknesses include 24-hour access to the airport by all employees,
unlimited access to any and all aircraft without accountability and unlimited
ability to depart the airport without accountability. Staff could gain access to
secure parts of the airport even when off-duty, and carry contraband
unchallenged.
Some US airports have set about raising standards individually. San Francisco
introduced a safety and security programme in response to the OIG audit which it
claims is among the most comprehensive in the world. The airport created a task
force specifically to improve security access. The airport now has security
guards stationed 24 hours a day at key airfield access doors. All have alarms
and most have cameras which are connected to the emergency communications
centre. Card and palm readers are used to identify movements, and to selectively
restrict access.
The airport has also installed seven explosive detection devices (CTX 5000)
and trace detectors at all security screening areas.
However, until this technology becomes the norm at more airports worldwide,
many remain exposed to risk.ˇ
Nepal suspended security personnel
pending an investigation into how security safeguards were
breached
The FAA wants mandatory certification for companies
hired by the airlines to perform security screening at airports. It also wants
to establish uniform standards for security screening company performance, strengthen
training and testing standards for screeners, and impose more stringent experience
and training requirements on screening company managers and instructors.