Opposition MPs from the Committee for Defense and Security have missed the opportunity to obtain insight into the legality of the exercise of one of the most controversial functions of any intelligence service, including the National Security Agency (ANB).
However, after the Committee members from the ruling majority realized insight into ANB work, the Committee should have prepared and adopted a report on this visit, the assessment of the degree of legality and the results of applying measures of secret surveillance.
It is particularly important that the Committee officially highlights its assessment of the quality of information they have been provided by the ANB. It should be noted what type of documents and information Committee members had access to, under what conditions and with what restrictions.
Committee’s report should propose measures for avoiding situations like the one we witnessed yesterday, when part of the Committee members refused to participate in the control visit under the conditions imposed by the ANB.
These measures should involve a detailed explanation of security checks and procedures the MPs must pass in order to access information in the premises of the ANB.
In the interest of enhancing Parliament’s control functions and strengthening confidence in the security and defence institutions, conditions for smooth realization of control over the application of secret surveillance measures must be created as soon as possible.
Committee on Security and Defense should initiate proceedings for the application of equivalent control of the Police Directorate as well.
(Statement given by the President of the Institute Alternative’s Managing Board Stevo Muk on the occasion when members of the Parliamentary Committee for defense and security from the opposition ranks refused to enter the premises of the National Security Agency (ANB), because they refused to be searched and leave their mobile phones at the entrance. Members of the Committee were supposed to determine whether ANB respects the law during the process of implementation of measures of eavesdropping and covert surveillance.)
