Essential poll finds a high degree of concern about press freedom, metadata and the encryption legislation
Three quarters of Australians are concerned about recent federal
police raids on journalists and the scale of requests for
telecommunications data, a new poll has found.
The Essential Poll, conducted for the charity Digital Rights Watch, finds a high degree of concern about press freedom, metadata and the encryption legislation – all of which are currently being reviewed by the parliamentary joint committee on intelligence and security.
It comes as Peter Dutton signalled a more aggressive approach on national security, warning Labor it would “not tolerate” attempts to water down Coalition legislation.
The poll of 1,089 voters asked about three recent developments
relating to enforcement agencies’ access to digital information “in the
interest of national security”.The Essential Poll, conducted for the charity Digital Rights Watch, finds a high degree of concern about press freedom, metadata and the encryption legislation – all of which are currently being reviewed by the parliamentary joint committee on intelligence and security.
It comes as Peter Dutton signalled a more aggressive approach on national security, warning Labor it would “not tolerate” attempts to water down Coalition legislation.
Asked about AFP raids on “the offices and homes of News Corp and ABC journalists who reported on national security issues”, 40% of respondents said they were “very concerning”, 34% said “slightly concerning” and 26% said the development “does not concern me at all”.
Coalition voters were less likely to be “very concerned” (27%) than Labor voters (50%), with more Coalition voters also saying it did not concern them at all (32%).
Asked about the fact government agencies have made 350,000 requests for metadata since 2015 changes that require “telecommunication companies [to] retain data on every Australian”, 35% said it was “very concerning”, 41% said “slightly concerning” and 24% said it “does not concern me at all”.
Asked about December 2018 changes that give law enforcement agencies “the power to break into encrypted communications systems (such as WhatsApp, Messenger or Viber) in the investigation of relatively minor offences”, 34% of respondents said it was “very concerning”, 37% said “slightly concerning” and 29% said it “does not concern me at all”.
On both metadata and encryption, Coalition voters were the least concerned, with just a quarter of them saying the laws were “very concerning”, compared with about 39% for Labor and 45% for the Greens.
Since the poll was conducted from Wednesday to Sunday, the commonwealth ombudsman has revealed a series of illegal metadata searches, including Western Australian police obtaining invalid warrants targeting journalists and ACT police accessing data 116 times without proper authorisation.
Industry has consistently raised concerns about the commercial impact of encryption legislation but the Coalition has rejected Labor amendments to improve oversight of the regime.
In a submission to the PJCIS the Australian Civil Society Coalition – which includes Digital Rights Watch and the Human Rights Law Centre – called for the encryption legislation to be repealed in its entirety.
It called for a new system requiring a judicial warrant for law enforcement agencies to obtain technical assistance notices or technical capability notices, which require technology companies and communications providers to help or build new capabilities to allow spying on criminal suspects.
“Without independent review, overreach and abuse is likely, as we have seen in relation to the metadata retention regime under [telecommunication intercepts] generally,” it said.
The coalition also called for amendments to “close the loophole that currently allows agencies to use [encryption legislation] powers to access journalist metadata without a warrant”.
In its submission on press freedom, the Human Rights Law Centre noted the burgeoning number of agencies using metadata including “local councils have accessed metadata to pursue unpaid fines and enforce minor infringements”.
The HRLC recommended limits on access to data, by agency and seriousness of offence, and a new requirement for a warrant to access metadata. Currently only access to journalists’ metadata requires a warrant.
It also called for the two-year mandatory retention period to be “reduced to the minimum period reasonably required for investigations”.
A home affairs department report on the regime revealed that 75% of all requests were for data three months old or less.
The Digital Rights Watch chairman, Tim Singleton Norton, said that “people are concerned about the raft of powers that have been given to law enforcement over the past few years – the problem continues to be the lack of transparency and oversight over how these powers are used”.
“In the last year alone, government agencies made more than 300,000 requests for metadata, with only five of these requests being refused,” he told Guardian Australia.
“That’s a huge disparity, and one that points to what we’ve known all along – this is blanket surveillance of the entire Australian population.
“The passage of the encryption-breaking powers last year was a complete debacle, and it’s clear that Australians are not comfortable with these powers being used against them.”
No comments:
Post a Comment