Federal Attorney-General Daryl Williams yesterday released details of finalised Government amendments to the counter-terrorism package, changes which were set in motion following September 11.
-Contrary to suggestions by some critics, the proposed change does not allow law enforcement agencies to read e-mails and SMS messages at whim," a statement from the Attorney-General's office, relating to the counter-terrorism package, said. -Rather, it recognises that an interception warrant is not appropriate for a situation in which no interception is necessary and that other lawful means, such as a search warrant would be more useful."
However, Cameron Murphy, president of the NSW Council for Civil Liberties -- a non-governmental organisation which touts itself as a watchdog over civil liberties and individual rights -- believes we need to scrap all the anti-terrorism measures before Parliament and take a fresh approach.
-What the government is proposing, even though it's been watered down, is still totally and completely unreasonable -- it's not going to get terrorists -- it's just going to trap ordinary members of the Australian community," Murphy said.
Murphy points to last year's controversy surrounding the Defence Signals Directorate (DSD) and intercepted phone calls as one example. He believes we need to have adequate reporting of what these agencies are doing, such as how many times they request a warrant and how often they get them, so the community knows the extent of tracking or interception of telecommunications that is going on.
The counter-terrorism package, for which Government has finalised amendments, is a bundle of legislation. It includes the Security Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) Bill 2002; Criminal Code Amendment (Suppression of Terrorist Bombings) Bill 2002; Suppressing of the Financing of Terrorism Bill 2002; Border Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2002; and the Telecommunications Interception Legislation Amendment Bill 2002.
The Government would not be adopting the Senate Committee's recommendation on the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979 at this stage, according to the statement.
It has indicated that a review would be undertaken by the Interception Consultative Committee.
Typical;If the Feds can't control it or it doesn't meet their feeble mindset, then they ban it! An individuals privacy is not negotiable, no matter what the circumstances may be!
If terrorism is involved, the law enforcement agencies must use the courts and judiciary to obtain approval for any snooping they may deam necessary to track down terrorists. These laws are available now, to the agencies, without adding further restriction or providing additional unsupervised access.
To give these secret agencies absolute power to snoop without judicial approval, is only one step away from a J.Edgar Hoover senario of the 50/60's in the U.S.A. No one was free from his snooping because he was not answerable to the parliament or the courts. He had and used the absolute power he had to satisfy his own distorted values. No one was safe or free from his dictatorship.