[LINK] New secret search powers

[Adam Todd]

At 03:04 AM 1/08/2007, Kim Holburn wrote:
>http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/new-secret-search-powers/ 
>2007/07/31/1185647903263.html?s_cid=rss_news
>
>>New secret search powers
>>
>>Tom Allard
>>August 1, 2007
>>
>>POLICE and security agencies will be given unprecedented "sneak and
>>peek" powers to search the homes and computers of suspects without
>>their knowledge under legislation to go before Federal Parliament
>>next week.
>>
>>The extensive powers - which also give federal police the right to
>>monitor communications equipment without an interceptions warrant -
>>come amid growing public disquiet about counter-terrorism powers
>>following the bungled handling of the Mohamed Haneef case.

Oh great and the chatroom logs they intercepted were so devastating 
the whole world want to hunt down Haneef - not to charge him but to 
say sorry for the appalling way Aus treated him.

Intercepting my phone calls didn't help the Police, other than to 
charge me with an offence that doesn't exist (NSW SC Justice Latham 
July 6, 2007)

>>Under the laws, officers from the federal police and other agencies
>>would be able to execute "delayed notification warrants", allowing
>>them to undertake searches, seize equipment and plant listening
>>devices in businesses and homes.

And does the law say that a citizen if guilty of an offence if they 
search for and disable the devices?  Or will that be a case of the 
Government saying "It's not my device" which happened in Police V 
Todd 29 January 2004 :)

Someone might explain how the conversation I had with my wife in the 
bedroom that morning was repeated by the Prosecution an hour later in 
the court room :)

>>Police and security officers will be able to assume false
>>identities to gain entry and conduct the surreptitious searches.

Haven't they heard of Tresspass?  Plenty V Dillion.  They can assume 
any identity, unless "they" have an appointment they can stay in the 
street and use a laser listening device.

I love those :)  I modulate a laser in the same frequency range right 
back at them with 1 kHz, 5kHz and 10 kHz tones at -3 dB :)

>>But the person affected by the raid does not have to be informed
>>for at least six months, and can remain in the dark for 18 months
>>if the warrant is rolled over.

That's assuming a person is stupid enough not to know.  Who in this 
day and age isn't monitoring their own security and privacy?

I get monthly requests to do house and business security sweeps, 
physical, electronic and IT.

>>The warrant is to be issued by the head of a police service or
>>security agency without the approval of a judicial officer. It can
>>also be extended for more than 18 months with the sanction of the
>>minister.

Ohh that's interesting.  That will conflict with the 
Constitution!  Will simply be a case of suing for Trespass and asking 
a constitutional question pursuant to Section 51 :)


>>The lack of judicial oversight was justified by the Minister for
>>Justice and Customs, David Johnston, on the grounds that a court or
>>judicial officer might leak news of the warrant.

And this has happened before?

>>"I don't want to impugn anyone, but the security of these
>>operations has to be pristine," Senator Johnston told the Herald.

Gee, we are a stupid species!

>>Moreover, the warrant can be issued for any offence that carries a
>>prison term of 10 years or more, despite a strong recommendation
>>from a bipartisan Senate committee earlier this year that it only
>>be used for investigations into terrorism, organised crime and
>>"offences involving death or serious injury with a maximum penalty
>>of life imprisonment".

Well that's most things now :)  Except Drink Driving.

Add that to the Immigration Character test and, oh hang 
on.  No.  Sorry, prison colony.