New Zealand Weighs Data Sharing with US Amid Border Security Concerns
New Zealanders’ biometric information and other sensitive personal data could soon be accessible to the United States government under a newly proposed border security agreement. The move, prompted by US demands for enhanced data sharing, has ignited debate over privacy, data sovereignty, and potential overreach by US enforcement agencies.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) has confirmed ongoing discussions with the US regarding the scope and requirements of an Enhanced Border Security Partnership (EBSP). The US is pushing for agreements with its 42 Visa Waiver Program partners – countries whose citizens can visit the US for up to 90 days without a visa – with a deadline of the end of the year to finalize negotiations or risk losing visa-free travel status for their citizens.
The potential for New Zealand data to end up in the hands of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), a controversial agency with a history of aggressive enforcement tactics, is a central concern. Critics are raising alarms about the lack of transparency surrounding the negotiations and the potential implications for civil liberties.
Currently, biometric data sharing between the Five Eyes intelligence alliance – comprising New Zealand, Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States – operates on a limited “hit/no-hit” basis. This system provides minimal initial information and requires case-by-case approval for further data requests. However, an EBSP could grant the US full, automated access to New Zealand’s national databases, a significant departure from existing protocols.
MFAT has remained tight-lipped about the specifics of the negotiations, refusing to detail what safeguards are being considered to protect New Zealanders’ private information or confirm whether any ICE personnel are currently stationed in New Zealand. The department offered only a brief statement: “New Zealand officials continue to discuss the requirements and scope of an Enhanced Border Security Partnership with the United States.”
Concerns extend beyond potential misuse of data by ICE. A US Department of Homeland Security privacy assessment acknowledges that shared biometric information could be used to vet any individual “encountered” during border inspections or immigration investigations, raising the specter of expanded surveillance.
European regulators have warned that such agreements could extend to minors and victims or witnesses of crime. The potential for broad data collection and retention is particularly troubling, as it could impact individuals long after their initial travel to the US.
Green Party foreign affairs spokesperson Teanau Tuiono has criticized the lack of transparency, calling for parliamentary oversight and public scrutiny of the agreement. “We are seeing that alarm right across the world with the direction the US is going,” Tuiono said. “This is not a time for us to be seeking closer engagement and relationships with the US.”
Thomas Beagle, chair of the Council of Civil Liberties, warned that the proposed scheme is far more invasive than existing data-sharing arrangements. He pointed to concerns about the current US political climate and the actions of agencies like ICE. “They have government-sponsored gangs of people wearing masks who refuse to identify themselves, disappearing people off the streets,” Beagle said. “This is seriously in the direction of heading towards fascism.”
Experts also highlight the potential impact on Māori data sovereignty. Dr. Karaitiana Taiuru, a Māori data sovereignty expert, emphasized the sacred nature of DNA within Māori culture. He expressed concern that sharing police databases, which may contain biased information due to historical overpolicing of Māori communities, could have detrimental consequences.
The New Zealand Privacy Commission declined to comment on whether it had been consulted or what safeguards should be in place. However, a spokesperson noted that the Privacy Act and the new Biometric Processing Privacy Code contain rules regarding data collection, retention, and sharing, but other legislation could take precedence.
Saira Hussain, a senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a US digital civil rights group, expressed concern about a shift in US data collection practices under the Trump administration. She warned of a “let’s grab everything first and ask questions later approach,” raising fears about data breaches, misuse, and unintended consequences.
Auckland University law professor Gehan Gunasekara acknowledged New Zealand’s limited negotiating power, stating that only large trading blocs like the European Union are in a position to effectively negotiate safeguards. He emphasized the need for robust oversight and controls, referencing past criticisms of New Zealand’s intelligence agencies regarding transparency and data handling.
Several countries, including Israel and Bahrain, have already signed agreements under the EBSP framework. The European Union is currently negotiating an overarching framework, allowing member states to pursue individual agreements. Australia has not publicly confirmed its participation in negotiations.
