Australian Labor and and Liberal Senators united in votes for extended and more intrusive secret police powers


First 5 of 5 paragraphs shown  Labor and Liberals joined forces to oppose amendments by the Greens and independents.
 The act specify the circumstances in which it is lawful to intercept communications. The Greens concern was discretion is too broad for network operators to intercept communications and disclose them. There will be no guidance whatsoever in the event that these matters reach a court.
 Green asked and were refused - a common-sense or consensus definition of what is meant by network protection duties?
 Senator Ludlam for the Greens said  “I guess the takeaway message for system operators or network administrators is that, if they find their obligations under this legislation ambiguous, they are to give the Attorney- Generals office a call. I guess we will just have to take that advice and make sure that people know that that is their recourse. With no further comment”.
   ...Log in to read rest of Article or image.
(2010-02-04)

Please log in to see references.

Article in: [EWN Publishing]
Article Tags: [ Human Rights ][ Security ]


Related Articles
Australian network administrators, ISPs told - if Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendments Bill ambiguous; call author, Attorney-General | Australia Greens propose debate - Australia should withdraw all troops from Afghanistan: ALP and LIberals ban debate, in 30 to 6 vote | Australian Labor and and Liberal Senators united in votes for extended and more intrusive secret police powers | Control of Police use of pornography, example of “network security” power in Australian Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendments |

Media Mogul Toolbox

Get Weekly Volume

RSS Feed

(Log In to access search functions.)