In a review of Australia's ability to meet the challenges of -the new terrorist environment," a raft of proposals, including amendments to the Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 1979, were endorsed at a Cabinet meeting Tuesday, according to the Department for Attorney General Darryl Williams.
However amendments to the Act, which was originally only used when ASIO and the police were investigating -top end criminality", broadens the number of people able to order a telecommunications interception from the usual -uniformed police and trench-coat spooks" to agencies such as the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC) and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) which themselves have prosecution powers, EFA chairman Kim Heitman told ZDNet Australia.
-It's a government run completely out of control here," Heitman said. -The government is obviously in a panic about terrorist acts and in the meantime they've forgotten why there are checks and boundaries on government surveillance."
According to Heitman, the original Telecommunications Interception Act once placed a very high value on personal privacy - something that differentiated Australian legislation from that of European states.
ASIO and other law enforcement agencies were unable to intercept unread e-mails as the communication was said to belong to the sender, not the recipient. However, the Act has evolved to the stage now that police are using telecommunications networks as part of routine investigations, such as petty fraud, Heitman added.
EFA's position has consistently been that what's needed is more -coppers on the beat" than new powers but instead -we've got a creep of police powers under the shadow of September 11 but not exactly in direct response to it," Heitman said. -We don't think you can counteract terrorism by becoming more of a dictatorship," he added.
Although mere proposals as present, Heitman believes the amendments are a -fait-accompli" and once increased powers are granted they'll never be called back. -The threat of terrorism might pass but the threat to civil liberties will be set in concrete," he said
The review, headed by Attorney-General's department secretary Robert Cornall, found that "the profound shift in the international security environment has meant that Australia's profile as a terrorist target has risen and our interests abroad face a higher level of terrorist threat. While there remains no known specific threat of terrorism in Australia, Cabinet has endorsed a raft of measures to enhance our ability to meet the challenges of the new terrorist environment," a statement issued from the Attorney General's deparment said.
Cabinet will give further consideration to additional issues arising out of the review in the new year.
The Office of the Attorney General did not return calls by press time.
Beware..this is only the begining. Cynical is right to point out that a high governmental official,Attorny General, Darryl Williams,says "My expectation is that it would be used only in very serious cases...". He can say anything. He is in a protected position. Read 2 paqragraphs above. He can't be identified or prosecuted if he chooses to leak anything. In that same paragraph Williams says it is to be done if there is "suspicion that a person may be able to assist by providing information..." Oh,yeah, and what will be used to persuade him to do it? Blackmail? A rubber hose? Note that the AG played down this ammendment. His off handed comment that there is a small "gap" in the legislation. He says it is only a drafting issue. Bulls... This tightening up of already questionable law is to prevent ANYONE under ANY circumstatces questioning his moves.
Brutus said to Ceaser with referance to his co-conspirator "Beware the lean and hungry look". That is the key to the problem. Ambitious men (or women). They seek to find a situation troublesome to the public and from which they are insulated and propose legislation which empowers THEM. All in the name of the public good.
To live a secure life is not an unreasonable desire. But is an unreasonable demand. Life itself is an "iffy" proposition. Crossing the street is hazardous to your health. When desire is turned into an expectation and comes to a junction with an ambitious person that person will expoit it. Always. And always at a cost to the recipient and a handsome benifit to that person.
We in the US have been experiencing the same situation further evolved. The "conspiracy and confascation"laws. Designed in the '30s to entrap upper echelon Mafia gangsters. The application has been broadened to be used across the board to any "crime". In New York and New Jersey it is even being used to punish a john for patronizing a prostitute. His name and address is published in the newspaper, his car confiscated and sold (used in the commission of a crime)and he is fined or jailed Quite a profitable business for the police.
SO WATCH OUT. All laws evolve. Seldom to the good