[LINK] Fwd: MEDIA: Two convicted for refusal to decrypt data

[Jan Whitaker]

from the privacy list

>Two convicted for refusal to decrypt data
>
>http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08/11/ripa_iii_figures/
>
>Posted in Policing, 11th August 2009 13:17 GMT
>
>Two people have been successfully prosecuted for 
>refusing to provide authorities with their 
>encryption keys, resulting in landmark 
>convictions that may have carried jail sentences of up to five years.
>
>The government said today it does not know their fate.
>
>
>
>The power to force people to unscramble their 
>data was granted to authorities in October 2007. 
>Between 1 April, 2008 and 31 March this year the 
>first two convictions were obtained.
>
>The disclosure was made by Sir Christopher Rose, 
>the government's Chief Surveillance Commissioner, in his recent annual report.
>
>The former High Court judge did not provide 
>details of the crimes being investigated in the 
>case of either individual - neither of whom were 
>necessarily suspects - nor of the sentences they received.
>
>The Crown Prosecution Service said it was unable 
>to track down information on the legal 
>milestones without the defendants' names.
>
>Failure to comply with a section 49 notice 
>carries a sentence of up to two years jail plus 
>fines. Failure to comply during a national 
>security investigation carries up to five years jail.
>
>Sir Christopher reported that all of the 15 
>section 49 notices served over the year - 
>including the two that resulted in convictions - 
>were in "counter terrorism, child indecency and domestic extremism" cases.
>
>The Register has established that the woman 
>served with the first section 49 notice, as part 
>of an animal rights extremism investigation, was 
>not one of those convicted for failing to 
>comply. She was later convicted and jailed on blackmail charges.
>
>Of the 15 individuals served, 11 did not comply 
>with the notices. Of the 11, seven were charged 
>and two convicted. Sir Christopher did not 
>report whether prosecutions failed or are 
>pending against the five charged but not 
>convicted in the period covered by his report.
>
>To obtain a section 49 notice, police forces 
>must first apply to the National Technical 
>Assistance Centre (NTAC). Although its web 
>presence suggests NTAC is part of the Home 
>Office's Office of Security and Counter 
>Terrorism, it is in fact located at the 
>government's secretive Cheltenham code breaking centre, GCHQ.
>
>GCHQ didn't immediately respond to a request for 
>further information on the convictions. The Home 
>Office said NTAC does not know the outcomes of the notices it approves.
>
>NTAC approved a total of 26 applications for a 
>section 49 notice during the period covered by 
>the Chief Surveillance Commissioner's report, 
>which does not say if any applications were 
>refused. The judicial permission necessary to 
>serve the notices was then sought in 17 cases. 
>Judges did not refuse permission in any case.
>
>One police force obtained and served a section 
>49 notice without NTAC approval while acting on 
>"incorrect information from the Police National 
>Legal Database", according to Sir Christopher. 
>The action was dropped before it reached court. ®


Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
jwhit at janwhitaker.com
blog: http://janwhitaker.com/jansblog/
business: http://www.janwhitaker.com

Our truest response to the irrationality of the 
world is to paint or sing or write, for only in such response do we find truth.
~Madeline L'Engle, writer

_ __________________ _