<<

. 3
( 61 .)



>>

(e.g., mass decontamination, medical supply distribution, isolation, evac-
uation, quarantine, compulsory medical exams and vaccinations, security
for health care sites and shipments, etc.). Personnel should be trained and
equipped to execute the plans, and the plans should be exercised through
periodic drills.
Benchmarking and best practices should be developed and shared
to guide the design, exercise, implementation, and revision of plans,
protocols, and procedures. Measurable standards and metrics must be
developed to promote and determine accountability, performance, and
progress.
The relevant constituencies include police, customs, immigration,
intelligence, bioscientists, health care professionals, emergency manage-
ment, military/security organizations, environmental management, agri-
culture, and other relevant private and public resources (local, regional,
national, and international).
Broadly speaking, however, the principal relevant constituencies are
the law enforcement, bioscience, and public health communities. These
three communities must work together nationally and internationally to
analyze the relevant threats that each sees in order to help society enhance
the likelihood of preventing a bioterrorist attack and of minimizing the
damage if such an attack occurs. Unfortunately, the law enforcement,
xxi
FOREWORD

bioscience, and public health communities have very limited history of
working together nationally in most countries, even less so internation-
ally.
These three communities must forge partnerships in order to ensure
an integrated approach. This is required to maximize the synergies of their
complementary skills, methodologies, perspectives, and resources, and to
minimize their con¬‚icts (e.g., in the collection, transport, and analysis of
evidence so as to best serve medical, epidemiological, intelligence, and law
enforcement purposes). This means overcoming many formidable obsta-
cles (security clearance, patient privacy, cultural divides, etc.), but it is
essential to do so.
Each agency has its own deeply embedded culture, and, generally
speaking, is highly resistant to change, even in times of crisis. Each agency
responds with its own routines, its own distinctive view of “the threat,” and
its own understanding of its particular mission. Although it is bene¬cial
for each agency to pursue its own mission, and with the methods that are
uniquely suited to that mission, it is also important to integrate these mis-
sions and methods across agencies. This type of coordination is dif¬cult
even among agencies that are all within the law enforcement community.
It is dramatically more so when the agencies are in different professional
communities. This is why it is so challenging to achieve effective collabo-
ration between law enforcement, bioscience, and public health agencies.
Undergirding all of the above is the need to modify legal and regulatory
frameworks to support the necessary activities. This means 1) the frame-
works for controlling the manufacture, possession, storage, transporta-
tion, use, traf¬cking, and deployment of pathogens, and their means of
production, weaponization, and delivery; 2) the frameworks for thwarting
attacks before they occur (e.g., intelligence, investigation, interdiction, and
disruption); 3) the frameworks relating to the protection of the points of
possible pathogen intrusion (e.g., those relating to water supplies and the
food chain); 4) the frameworks relating to activities aimed at early detec-
tion of attacks that do occur (e.g., so-called medical surveillance systems);
and 5) the frameworks governing the activities required for attack response
(isolation, quarantine, forced medical exams, forced vaccinations, inves-
tigation, etc.).
All of the above-described required actions should be done on the
local, national, regional, and international levels. The inherent nature of
this threat is global. International coordination is therefore essential. For
example, national and international Incident Response Teams special-
ized in bioterrorism should be assembled for rapid deployment whenever
xxii FOREWORD

and wherever a major incident occurs. Ultimately, to address the threat of
bioterrorism, international cooperation must be strengthened. Achieving
this is a central part of Interpol™s mission.


WHAT INTERPOL IS DOING

In order to understand Interpol™s role in the international effort to prevent
and respond to bioterrorism, one must understand what Interpol is today.
Interpol is the world™s largest international law enforcement organization,
linking together essentially all of the world™s law enforcement agencies
(covering 186 member countries). It has been around since 1923, but it is
virtually all new.
Interpol has reorganized itself around three core functions. The ¬rst
core function is to maintain the world™s ¬rst secure global law enforcement
communication system. This system, called I-24/7, was created by Interpol
in 2001, and it now allows law enforcement agencies around the world to
exchange information in real time, and to have instant access to Interpol
databases and notices.
The second core function is to further develop Interpol databases (such
as our database of wanted and suspected terrorists and other interna-
tional criminals, stolen passports, ¬ngerprints, and DNA) and interna-
tional notices (which serve to alert global law enforcement of fugitives, sus-
pected terrorists, dangerous criminals, missing persons, weapons threats,
and unidenti¬ed dead bodies, and, in the case of the Red Notice, to request
the arrest of a wanted person anywhere in the world). These databases and
notices represent powerful tools in the ¬ght against terrorism and other
serious international crime, and their contents, usage, and results have
been soaring in recent years.
The third core function is to provide operational police support ser-
vices to Interpol™s National Central Bureaus and member countries™ law
enforcement agencies wherever and whenever it is needed. This means
access to Interpol experts who are available to aid police agencies in spe-
ci¬c investigations. It also means access to Interpol™s Command and Coor-
dination Centre, which operates around the clock in all of Interpol™s four
of¬cial languages (English, French, Spanish, and Arabic) and serves as the
¬rst point of contact for any member country faced with a crisis situation.
Incident Response Teams are also available and can be dispatched to the
scene within hours of an attack. Major Event Support Teams are available
to help secure major international events.
xxiii
FOREWORD

These types of communication, coordination, access to information,
and expert assistance are crucial in the ¬ght against terrorism and other
serious international crime.
Together with its 186 National Central Bureaus in its 186 Member Coun-
tries, Interpol has in recent years implemented major changes in response
to the threat of terrorism. In 2004, we began moving into the area of bioter-
rorism prevention and response in particular.
We sought and received funding from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation to
create a Bioterrorism Prevention Program to be delivered to law enforce-
ment in collaboration with the bioscience and public health communities,
as well as the other relevant professional communities. The Sloan Foun-
dation has since committed $2.5 million and the Canadian Department
of Foreign Affairs and International Trade has since committed $300,000,
which will support Interpol™s Bioterrorism Prevention Program in its cur-
rent form through 2007.
We identi¬ed the former Director General of the UK National Criminal
Intelligence Service, John Abbott, to chair a steering committee to guide
the program. We recruited a small but talented staff to develop and imple-
ment the program. We have regularly drawn on the expertise of experts
from various related ¬elds. In fact, it was Professor Barry Kellman who ¬rst
inspired me to make this a priority for Interpol and the international law
enforcement community.
To kick off the program in a way that would bring together all of the
professional communities under one roof at one time, Interpol hosted
the Global Conference on Preventing Bioterrorism in March 2005 at Inter-
pol Headquarters in Lyon, France. That event was attended by over 500
law enforcement of¬cials and other professionals from 155 countries, as
well as representatives of 16 international organizations. It was the largest
gathering of international law enforcement in history.
The results of that conference have been positive and far-reaching, but
they have also highlighted the tremendous amount of work needed to be
done in this area.
Through the Interpol Bioterrorism Prevention Program, we provide
an awareness campaign, capacity-building measures, expertise, training,
and knowledge to law enforcement “ to help them develop effective plans
to meet the threat of bioterrorism. And we help them form bridges to
the bioscience and public health communities. We encourage them to
enhance interagency cooperation at the national and international levels.
And we urge policy makers to enact laws and regulations that provide law
xxiv FOREWORD

enforcement with the tools they need to prevent attacks and to respond to
them.
Relevant information and training are provided to law enforcement
worldwide through workshops and other training modalities. We have
conducted regional workshops in Africa, South America, Europe, and Asia,
attended by law enforcement of¬cials and other professionals from a total
of 115 countries. This knowledge transfer and training improve capabili-
ties to prevent attacks and to respond to them. It also forges partnerships
among the relevant communities. And it encourages national police forces
to become advocates for resources to augment their capabilities and for
improvements in the legal and regulatory frameworks within which they
operate.
We have created a “Bioterrorism Prevention Resource Center” on our
website that is now at the disposal of the entire law enforcement commu-
nity. This site helps police ¬nd training materials, online tests, scienti¬c
documents, planning guidelines, response and crisis management mate-
rials, and other useful resources.
We are developing another part of our website that will be dedicated to
training materials that have been provided to us by our National Central
Bureaus and governments, to show what is being done at national levels
in terms of bioterrorism preparedness and response.
We have designed “Table-Top” exercises that are conducted with great
effect at our workshops. We will be conducting various “Train-the-Trainer”
programs and international interagency exercises. We have created the
“Interpol Bioterrorism Incident Pre-Planning and Response Guide” to be
used by police around the world.
We convened a board of experts comprised of professionals from the
health and bioscience ¬elds, the police, and the specialized bodies of the
United Nations to help us network with these diverse communities, and
to identify emerging developments and opportunities that might enhance
our program.
In the future, we hope to ¬nd ¬nancing for a police of¬cer rotation
program in which police can rotate through our Bioterrorism Prevention
Program, bringing their added expertise to the program, and then return-
ing home with still greater expertise to share with their national colleagues
in building their own programs.
With the help of the U.S. State Department, which provided a grant of
$554,000, we launched a new project that focuses on biocriminalization.
The project™s goal is to assess the relevant criminal and administrative
xxv
FOREWORD

laws around the world, and to assist countries in drafting, enacting, and
enforcing such laws.
We are studying the possibility of making available to global law
enforcement a database of information relating to all known cases of
bioterrorism.
There is a great need for the development of other global databases
relating to bioterrorism “ databases relating to the manufacture, posses-
sion, storage, transportation, and use of pathogens, and their means of
production, weaponization, and delivery. Unfortunately, such develop-
ment is costly, and Interpol would require external funding for any such
new initiatives.
As the world™s largest international law enforcement organization,
embracing 186 member countries and their National Central Bureaus,
Interpol can play a critical role in helping the world confront the threat
of bioterrorism. But the world must begin taking this threat much more
seriously. This means devoting greater focus and greater resources, which
are always in limited supply, but never more precious than the life itself
that hangs in the balance.
Acknowledgments




Here, I can inadequately offer a few words to recognize the enormous
debts owed to colleagues and friends. If there is a fun aspect to working
on a subject as inherently dismaying as bioviolence, it is the opportunity
to engage and be engaged by these people and many others who, due to
limited space and failing memory, are regrettably omitted.
First, to the DePaul University College of Law. DePaul University is ded-
icated to the Vincentian Mission, which propounds community service.
Viewing global bioviolence prevention as community service might have
seemed questionable, yet the institution™s support for my work has never
wavered. I am most grateful to Dean Glen Weissenberger, the law school™s
tireless administrators and staff, and my colleagues, all of whom have pro-
vided a working environment that nurtures development and exercise of
both scholarship and active participation in the global community.
Over the years, I have bene¬ted immensely from the research assis-
tance offered by many law students and other student associates. In par-
ticular, this book would be much less thorough and far later had it not been
for the contributions of Peter Zube, Gabriel Sanchez, Andrea Garcia, and
Shannon Kellman.
I am very proud of the network of scholars and friends who have gen-
erously offered advice and education. Of these, three deserve special grat-
itude for their intellectual stimulation and outright help. Special appre-
ciation to Cherif Bassiouni, who teaches me that international law is an
edi¬ce with ever-strengthening architecture and that we can contribute to
humanity by devoting intellectual effort to amplifying that legal architec-
ture. To Elizabeth Rindskopf Parker, who teaches me to elevate the tactics
of my lawyer craft and who demonstrates that a powerful mind wielded
gracefully can move the world. To Interpol Secretary General Ronald Noble,


xxvii
xxviii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

who, on the strength of his personal reputation and that of Interpol, has
actually taken my ideas into the arena of international governance.
I would also like to gratefully acknowledge the wisdom offered by the
colleagues who have read and commented upon portions of this book:
Barbara Kelly, Gigi Kwik, Jeanne Guilleman, Kay Mereish, Nancy Connell,
and Rocco Casagrande. There would be many more errors but for their
advice; remaining errors are entirely of my own making.
This book is very much the product of active engagement in policy
communities. That activity has been intensely stimulating because the fol-
lowing individuals and others unmentioned but appreciated have gener-
ously opened opportunities to participate and learn: Adrian Baciu, Alexan-
der Custaud, David Franz, David Hamon, David Heyman, David Koplow,
Eden Forsythe, Edward Tanzman, Eileen Choffnes, Guy Roberts, Iain Gille-
spie, James Leonard, Jenny Gromoll, Jo Husbands, John Parker, John Stein-
bruner, Jonathan Granoff, Lela Bakanidze, Malcolm Dando, Marc Ost¬eld,
Maurizio Barbeschi, Michael Allswede, Michael Moodie, Mihnea Motoc,
Orley Lindgren, Ottorino Cosivi, Robert Mikulak, Ronald Atlas, Samuel
Manteaw, Seth Carus, Sevim Garibayli, Suzanne Spaulding, Swithin Mun-
yantwali, Thomas Graham, and Tibor Toth. My work is so much the better
for your con¬dence and for the wisdom you have imparted. To those whom
I™ve neglected, please know that I regret any unintentional slight.
Deserving special mention are the foundations and particular persons
who provide the resources that enable ideas to be pursued and spread:

<<

. 3
( 61 .)



>>