3 ms·
"... But it would enable intelligence officers to identify who an individual or group is in contact with, how often and for how long. ..." Cynical enough to th
by bootload 15y ago
"... But it would enable intelligence officers to identify who an individual or group is in contact with, how often and for how long. ..."
Cynical enough to think GCHQ do this already & the legislation allows for more favourable results.
- iuguy 15y agoThe legislation would permit information obtained in this way being used in legal processes. Currently if GCHQ were doing intercepts in this way it would be unlawful, and as such evidence obtained through such potential intercepts would be inadmissible in a court terrorism case for example.
- 46Bit 15y agoHence why they claim the evidence is too sensitive to receive any public hearing. Secret tribunals and the like.
- bootload 15y ago"... Currently if GCHQ were doing intercepts in this way it would be unlawful, and as such evidence obtained through such potential intercepts would be inadmissible in a court ..." True, but wouldn't the sources be covered under OSA and hence not disclosed?
- iuguy 15y agoNot if you're going to court. There's a whole secret inquest thing that's been going on, occasionally popping up in the news. The problem with relying upon intelligence for evidential purposes is that you can often expose the handlers, assets or sources involved in a public trial.
- bootload 15y ago"... The problem with relying upon intelligence for evidential purposes is that you can often expose the handlers, assets or sources involved in a public trial. ..." Excellent point.