Are body scanners necessary at airports?

Airports say yes, but human rights activists disagree

By Lee Kyung-min

The country’s four major airports installed full-body scanners four years ago to prevent terrorism, despite concerns about civil liberties. According to Incheon International Airport Corp. (IIAC), however, the scanners have never detected any weapons.

Incheon Airport has three scanners, and Korea’s three other international airports have one each. The IIAC said Thursday that 64,656 outbound passengers had been subjected to full-body scans nationwide since October 2010, roughly 45 people a day. The total number of people to undergo scanning was 42,768 at Incheon; 13,236 at Gimhae; 4,428 at Gimpo and 4,224 at Jeju.

However, an official from IIAC said the process was not mandatory for all passengers.

“We give the passengers two options,” he said. “They can either go through the scanner, or have a pat-down search. We do not force them.”

Though many people have criticized the procedures as too invasive, the official said they were necessary security measures.

“We do not take a closer look at any particular part of the body with indecent intentions,” he added.

When asked whether the airport was considering removing the equipment, since there had been no terrorist attacks in four years, he said no.

“Hypothetically, let’s say a terrorist attack happened,” he said. “If we did not have such equipment, we would be bombarded with criticism that international airports as big as Incheon had no scanners that could have prevented the incident that caused the disaster,” he added.

Still, he refused to reveal the how the airport decides whom to classify as a security risk.

“There are several checklists,” he said. “If a passenger bought a one-way ticket, or paid in cash, etc. But we cannot reveal everything in detail,” he said.

Initially, the equipment was introduced here right before the G20 Seoul Summit was set to take place, in November 2010.

At the time, human rights groups criticized the government for a decision-making process they considered undemocratic.

“The government had already made its decision,” said Chang Yeo-kyung, a member of Jinbonet, a human rights organization. “There was no room for public debate over invasion of privacy, which is a human rights issue. … The heavy-handed manner of introducing the machines was the issue then.”

Chang said the issue was not whether the scanning process was invasive.

“What if the passenger wants neither the scan, nor a pat-down search?” asked Chang. “What then? There begins the question. Can a government force them to make a choice against its people’s will?”