Australian Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment Bill 2009 empowers vague, invasive “network protection duties”

First 7 of 7 paragraphs shown Concerns about the possible abuse of the term ‘network protection duties’, were on the mind of Senator Xenophon (South Australia), who wanted separation of:
- standard network protection; from
- direct monitoring of individual communications.
Spying in the name of “network protection duties” and “disciplinary action”. He was concerned the bill does not include a clearer definition of what activities are covered under the term network protection duties. This term determines whether someone is able to access and intercept another persons communication under the amendment. I believe that this definition, in its current form, is not strong enough to protect network users. Private communications should only be accessed by a third party when it is vital to network protection or in the case of professional misconduct.
Secondly, the amendments seek to clarify the definition of “appropriate use” too vague: It is important that this area of the legislation is clear so that both network owner-operators and users are aware of their responsibilities and rights.
Finally, the amendments ensure that copies made of information seized under the act will be destroyed along with the originals. Senator Xenophon's concerns were not accepted as valid and the ALP and Liberals voted the pas the Bill, unmended.
...Log in to read rest of Article or image.