1. Francis Lasalo Ngonga1 AVIATION SECURITY Last session’s recap  General definitions of safety & security  A few characteristics of security  AVSEC  All made to safeguard civil aviation against unlawful interferences  ICAO annex 17 & ISARPS  Cost of security

2. Francis Lasalo Ngonga2 PASSENGER SCREENING SYSTEMS PPopularity of commercial flying brought numerous challenges ee.g. offences and certain acts committed by pax aboard aircraft EEffects of such acts include: Jeopardizing/endangering the: Safety of aircraft in flight Safety of other passengers and property on board

3. 3 Cont. of Passenger screening systems TThe Tokyo convention of 14 December 1963 dealt with this issue as follows: LLevel one: State of registry and State of Landing if the act 1)Affects the state’s security and interests or 2)Committed by or against nationals of that state.

4. Francis Lasalo Ngonga4 Cont. of Passenger screening systems LLevel two Pilot in command (PIC) given power to: 1)Restrain and disembark 2)Request or authorize crewmembers or other passengers to help 3)Deliver or handover offender(s) to a competent authority

5. Francis Lasalo Ngonga5 Cont. of Passenger screening systems  Level three State of landing obligated to allow: 1)Distressed aircraft right to land 2)PIC to disembark passengers 3)Take in disembarked passengers and/or perpetrators 4)Retain aircraft and dispose/release aircraft when appropriate 5)Incriminate or extradite perpetrators if agreements exist

6. Francis Lasalo Ngonga6 PASSENGER SCREENING SYSTEMS  Preventing the entry of pax likely to cause offences and or any other unwanted act became a prime concern to civil airline operators  This was the ‘birth’ of passenger screening systems

7. Francis Lasalo Ngonga7 PASSENGER SCREENING SYSTEMS  Basic philosophy 1)Assessment of an individual to rule out the risk of threat 2)In the process there may be the necessity of further investigation 3)Sometimes process is referred to as pax profiling  The process involves: 1)Looking for suspicious patterns i.e. those suggesting risk 2)Use of data mining techniques i.e. collection of all available information on an individual

8. Francis Lasalo Ngonga8 Cont. The process Sources of information include: Credit card transactions, mobile phone, usage, fixed, telephone usage, previous airline reservations, any previous surveillances e.g. at airports, etc  In short you get total awareness information (TAI)  Collected TAI helps compute a numerical risk estimate for each pax

9. Francis Lasalo Ngonga9 Cont. The process  Pax with values greater than an ‘assessed threat value’ are selected for screening  Process greatly interferes with personal privacy  Hence faces a lot of opposition and or resistance from human rights groups

10. Francis Lasalo Ngonga10 TYPES OF PAX SCREENING SYSTEMS  Sophistication has been increasing over the years  From simple systems to complex systems using fairly advanced computer software programs  Use of CAPPS quite common  Computer Aided Passenger Prescreening Systems

11. Francis Lasalo Ngonga11 Cont. of types of pax screening systems  US commenced use of CAPPS I in 1998  Design of CAPPS II commenced around 2004  Usage has not commenced due to the initial intense opposition to privacy concerns  Had too much surveillance incorporated on to it  Seen as a creation of punishments by both parties – i.e. observer & observed

12. Francis Lasalo Ngonga12 Cont. of types of pax screening systems  CAPPS I flagged 6 of the 19 terrorists of the Sep 11, 2001 attacks  3 others had been questioned for false travel documents  N.B. Use of biometrics for positive identification has been adopted by ICAO

13. Francis Lasalo Ngonga13 Cont. of types of pax screening systems  Machine screening includes: 1)Metal detectors a)Hand held or walking through metal- detector portals b)Triggering the metal detector leads to a body search 2)Electronic screening – introduced into the US in 1973  Body searches

14. Francis Lasalo Ngonga14 Challenges of passenger screening  Difficulties associated with body searches: Searching favourable hiding places not easy e.g. Crotch areas, armpits, waist, ankles, anuses etc (case of Ronda Brent – 2001)  Physical body states – not comfortable: e.g. Disabled, elderly, sick-ling etc  El AI system of interrogation and or stripe search not favoured by passengers  Airport & airline staff  Diplomats

15. Francis Lasalo Ngonga15 Challenges of passenger screening PPax screening in general has not been smooth as it is not liked SSome pax want to deliberately test the capability of the security staff DDeveloping friendlier and effective CAPPS has given scholars a night mare NNow developing SSPSP Sequential Stochastic Passenger Screening Problem

16. Francis Lasalo Ngonga16 CONCLUSIONS  Pax understand they will be searched  Security personnel have the ‘last chance’ to prevent a catastrophe  Proper training & duty dedication is a must

17. Francis Lasalo Ngonga17 Clarifications, questions and feedback Thank you very much for your attention and cooperation