4 ms·
Also concerning is what they are doing towards companies (pardon the tangent): > It covers [...] device vendors [...] as long as they have "a nexus to Australi
by kodablah 8y ago
Also concerning is what they are doing towards companies (pardon the tangent):
> It covers [...] device vendors [...] as long as they have "a nexus to Australia"
> But what if the suspect stores the keys themselves? In that case, the government would pull out the big guns with a second kind of order called a technical capability notice. It forces communications providers to build new capabilities that would help the government access a target’s information where possible.
> What if the communications provider doesn’t want to help? Then they could face penalties from the government, or "injunctions or enforceable undertakings".
Yeah, right. But the precedent is alarming, because what is happening (and you see it with other "pro law enforcement" or "pro privacy" legislation too) is governments are giving themselves broad enforcement powers to ask for things and then only using it when push really comes to shove. This they-can-but-they-probably-won't approach towards enforcement is dangerous as it removes predictability in favor of government subjectivity. What does it mean in practice? It can mean that while Samsung or Apple would give them the middle finger resting on their size/leverage, a smaller company can't do that. So the enforcement agencies proportionalize their punishments to the amount tolerable without citizen backlash.
Everyone should just remember this tactic when we go around praising laws with big punishments for big companies just because we happen to like the spirit of the law. And also remember this when people call us stupid for questioning subjectivity of statute enforcement or the lack of statute enforcement in general when new versions of these laws are crafted.
- ShorsHammer 8y agoThe article mentions both child abusers and terrorists yet the laws will rarely be used for that. Mandatory metadata retention was also bought in for the same reasons and has barely appeared as evidence in any subsequent cases, despite >300,000 warrantless metadata requests last year, overseen by a handful of public servants behind closed doors, in a country of 25 million people. Another very concerning law is about "fixated persons", which was bought in with big budgets and huge teams of detectives solely dedicated to going after lone wolf terrorists, so far the only person charged is a former mining executive who was a respected lawyer and Head of Compliance at one of Australia's biggest gas companies (One of the largest gas exporters in the world.) She turned whistleblower on some corrupt deals and environmental coverups involving certain fracking leases and the government. After contacting the Mining Minister about it over the space of a few months, instead of investigating, the Minister referred her to the police, she was then deemed a "fixated person", which involved incarceration without charge, being taken to a mental institution and forcibly injected with anti-psychotic drugs for months. Eventually a judge decided she could go home. All media coverage of it is banned in Australia until the trial is finished, which has been postponed at every hearing for over a year now, time heals all wounds I guess. It's naive to think that those in power wouldn't abuse such laws. I'm all for giving police the powers they need and perhaps even more as long as there is transparent oversight and it's targeted, but the complete opposite is happening in many places on Earth right now. Monsters flourish in the darkness.
- antidesitter 8y agoDo you have more information about the case you’re referring to? I’d like to learn more.
- josephagoss 8y agoRegarding your example of this person being forced into a mental institution, are you able to provide a source? I'm interested in learning more especially as I'm living in Australia, this is quite terrifying indeed.
- d0lph 8y agoI did a search for "Fiona Wilson Australia fixated" and got back a few articles, not familiar enough with AU news to determine what is tabloids and what is not. Please post if anyone finds something reputable.
- kirrent 8y agoDid the same search. Everything is a tabloid or worse. Nothing reliable.
- ShorsHammer 8y agoWow that's a scary argument from authority, but you are right, only dubious blogs currently write about it. The mainstream media are highly aware of the case, they are all legally blocked from mentioning it until the trial is finished. A good article on the fixated persons unit by a QLD lawyer: https://independentaustralia.net/life/life-display/queensland-polices-orwellian-fixated-persons-unit,11395 https://independentaustralia.net/life/life-display/queenslan...
- deepspace 8y agoSame here. The most comprehensive write-up I could find was the blog post linked below. It contains a list of references but they all seem to point to irrelevant content, or to shady-looking 'news sources'. http://www.blotreport.com/australian-politics/are-the-thought-police-coming/ http://www.blotreport.com/australian-politics/are-the-though...