NSW Police: Destroying your privacy

Mar.04, 2009 in rest of australia

NSW police are set to be “given covert search warrants, allowing them to search a property without informing the owners for up to three years.” Yes you read that correctly, the police will actually be able to secretly search your house and you might not find out about it up till three years later, even if no charges are ever laid.

Apart from the uneasy feeling images of police ruffling through your belongings conjures up, one can’t help but wonder that if the police are now able to enter your home covertly and discreetly ransack the place, what or who is stopping them from planting evidence. Furthermore is such evidence submittable in court?

Not that I don’t trust police but what if someone had an axe to grind, or a department or someone’s job was at risk. Police are at the end of the day human and whilst the majority of them do their jobs with integrity and honesty there are always going to be the jerks that ruin it for the rest of them.

Not to mention the incredible bargaining power being able to tell suspects ‘we can search your house at any time day or night, with or without you there” grants authorities.

The warrants may only be granted when police suspect someone of a “serious offence punishable by at least seven years in jail”, NSW premier Nathan Rees reassures us that “If you are a serious criminal in NSW, you should not sleep easy.”

Vote winning statements like that make me feel all warm and fuzzy especially with the knowledge that this new police power would only be used for serious crimes. Serious crimes such as These offences the manufacture of drugs, the sale of firearms, homicide and kidnapping and computer crimes.

Down with the manufacturers of drugs, YEAH!

Down with the sale of firearms, YEAH!

Down with homicide and kidnapping, YEAH!

Down with computer cri-wait what?

Since when has anybody in this country been serious about computer crime? I mean it’s no state secret that bittorrent is ridiculously popular in Australia but when was anyone actually accused of being a serious criminal for committing computer crime?

I started to feel a bit worried so I closed uTorrent down and decided to have a look into what ‘computer crime’ was in this country and which computer crimes would be covered under these new covert search laws.

Sydney law firm “Armstrong Legal” lists a few computer crime offenses that qualify;

Unauthorised modification of data held in a computer

A person who:
(a) causes any unauthorised modification of data held in a computer, and

(b) knows that the modification is unauthorised, and

(c) intends by the modification to impair access to, or to impair the reliability, security or operation of, any data held in a computer, or who is reckless as to any such impairment, is guilty of an offence.

Maximum penalty: 10 years.

Unauthorised impairment of electronic communication to or from a computer

A person who causes any unauthorised computer function:
(a) knowing it is unauthorised, and

(b) with the intention of committing a serious indictable offence, or facilitating the commission of a serious indictable offence (whether by the person or by another person), is guilty of an offence.

Maximum penalty: 10 years

Cause an Unauthorised Computer Function / Unauthorised Access With Intent

A person who causes any unauthorised computer function:

(a) knowing it is unauthorised, and

Maximum penalty: If found guilty of the serious indictable offense, the penalty for this crime is then equal to that of the serious indictable offense, so basically ranging from the minimum sentence possible to the highest sentence possible for a indictable offense in the Australian legal system.

The first two laws sound vague and seem like common sense, ie. don’t hack into other people’s pc’s and access or break stuff. I guess you could spoof (digital equivalent of fabricate, which is stupidly easy to do when it comes to computers) some evidence enough so to warrant suspicion but a far easier solution would appear to be to focus on the third law.

The penalty for causing an unauthorised computer function or committing unauthorised access with intent is equal to that of a “serious indictable offense”, if you are found guilty of committing one.

Minor indictable offenses generally cover up to $30,000 total in theft. With that in mind,if you are found guilty of illegally sharing files the “penalties range from injunctions, damages and costs to fines up to $60,500 for individuals and up to $302,500 for corporations for each infringement, and/or up to five years’ jail.” Furthermore “It is estimated up to 70 per cent of net traffic in Australia is involved in illegal file-sharing.”

Lets look at what we have so far. Police are able to conduct stealth searches if they suspect you are committing a serious computer crime. A serious computer crime could involve downloading music which if found guilty of more then puts you into the serious indictable offense category and it’s estimated that 70 per cent of internet traffic in Australia is used for illegal activities.

Now the chances of this happening are bloody slim and I’ll happily admit that I’m not worried about the police searching my place when I’m not here any time soon; but it’s the fact that they are seemingly easily capable of doing it bugs me.

Police shouldn’t be granted the power to stealth search privately owned properties unannounced for up to three years because they suspect somebody might be stealing more then $30,000 worth of goods. I’m sure apart from downloading illegally there are other ‘general’ crimes that carry a potential fine of over $30,000 quite easily that can be manipulated into granting these stealth searches.

It doesnt come as any suprise that laws like this are enabled on the back of “anti-terrorism” legislation. I mean really, just how many potential terrorists do the police think there are in Australia enough to warrant stealth searching your property over such long periods of time?

How are we supposed to trust authorities if they don’t trust the population. I’ve got no problems with people being secretely monitored because there is evidence of crimes being committed, but on the basis of suspicion alone?

Just think, the next time your keys, mobile phone, shoes or tv remote turn up in a place you swore you never put them… it might just be because you never put them there in the first place.

Share this article: