2012 Annual Report of the Interception of Communications Commissioner
magistrate in the local court, which increases bureaucracy and time delays. Often the applicant
is not best placed to advise the magistrate on the communications data process or the conduct
that will be undertaken by the SPoC to acquire the data. In other cases, local authorities have
actually reported that the courts have tried to charge them directly for attending the court. The
figures that have been shared with my office to date show that no requests have yet been refused
by a magistrate.
Taking into account this evidence I question how much value judicial approvals have added
to the process. I have long been a proponent of the SPoC system and this ensures there is
a robust safeguard in relation to the acquisition and disclosure of communications data. The
Joint Committee conducting the pre-legislative scrutiny of the draft Communications Data Bill
concluded that “in the case of local authorities it should be possible for magistrates to cope with
the volume of work involved in approving applications for authorisation. But we believe that if our
recommendations are accepted and incorporated into the Bill, they will provide a stronger authorisation
test than magistrates can. Although approval by magistrates of local authority authorisations is a very
recent change in the law, we think that if our recommendations are implemented it will be unnecessary
to continue with different arrangements applying only to local authorities.” I concur with this sentiment
and am very concerned that there is a serious danger that that the types of crime that cause
real harm to the public (such as rogue traders and illegal money lenders) will not be investigated
properly due to the difficulties with the judicial approval process.
9.5 Data Protection Forum
I accepted an invitation in December 2012 to attend the Data Protection Forum and had
the opportunity to informally discuss my role as Commissioner. The Data Protection Forum
represents a group of industry professionals involved in securing the protection of personal data
held by government departments, private companies and other entities.
9.6 International Delegations
In May 2012 I attended the International Intelligence Review Agencies Conference in Ottawa,
Canada.This is an opportunity to meet with other national review organisations from around the
world and to discuss our roles, responsibilities and oversight regimes. At the conference I gave
a presentation jointly with the Rt Hon. Sir Malcolm Rifkind MP, Chairman of the Intelligence and
Security Committee.
9.7 Meeting with Other Oversight Commissioners
In November 2012, with my successor Sir Anthony May, I met with some of the other
Commissioners involved with intelligence, security and/or data oversight where we discussed
matters of common interest.
64