Stop the Search and Surveillance Bill NOW!

Right to silence removal 'radical and unwarranted'
The removal of the right to silence that is proposed in the Search and Surveillance Bill is 'radical and unwarranted' the Justice and Electoral Committee was told today. Speaking to his submission, Canterbury University academic, David Small, said the creation of any situations where New Zealanders lose their right to silence 'muddies the waters' and because instead of knowing they have an absolute right to remain silent, people will be wondering in what circumstances they are allowed to remain silent.

Dr Small said that civil rights were 'only as strong as they were exercisable' and this Bill not only undermined important rights but also made remaining rights harder to exercise and defend.

Dr Small also pointed to the ways that technological advances have already compromised people's privacy rights. He commented in particular on the common police practice of taking and searching cell phones which contain significant amounts of information that is very personal and often quite sensitive, with newer phones even allowing access to personal email and social networking accounts.

He said that this degree of intrusion used to require a court-issued warrant but is now regularly carried out, particularly against young people, often on suspicion of very minor offences.

'A Bill setting out search and surveillance rules should be limited existing powers, rather than extending them further', he said.

'The digitisation of our lives has not been matched by the introduction of new safeguards and that is one of the things that a Bill like this should do,' he said.

Dr Small, who has been monitoring the expansion of the powers and resources of state surveillance agencies since he caught two SIS agents breaking into the house of a fair trade activist in 1996, said that the actual risks faced in New Zealand were comparatively low and did not warrant a further expansion of powers.

Rather, he argued, there needs to be a thorough overhaul of the agencies that are supposed to be monitoring state surveillance and enforcement agencies and holding them to account. In particular, he cited the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security, the Police Complaints Authority and the Parliamentary Intelligence and Security Committee.

Brothers, Sisters – mates. Whatever part of the political spectrum any of us come from, surely we can all see the vast dangers to our democracy in allowing not only the Police, but the entire bloody state these vast new surveillance powers that they want. We should not allow the Police the power to break into your home and spy on you without a warrant, and we sure as hell shouldn’t give that power to the bloody Meat Industry!

This submission on rights to silence from David Small follows on from warnings by the Human Rights Commission...

State agency spy powers 'chilling'
The Human Rights Commission yesterday warned Parliament of the "chilling" implications of a proposed law that would see the intrusive powers usually only available to the police extended to all agencies with enforcement responsibilities. It said that under the law, council dog control officers would be able to enter homes to install a surveillance device and the Commerce Commission would be able to detain people. Inland Revenue would get the powers to assist its tax investigations, while the Meat Board would get them to enforce breaches of export rules.

WHAT'S IN THE BILL

THE POWERS:

Video surveillance, watching private activity on private property, installing tracking devices, detaining people during a search, power to stop vehicles without a warrant for a search, warrantless seizure of "items in plain view", power to hack into computers remotely, power to detain anyone at scene of search.

WHO WILL GET THEM:

Every agency with enforcement responsibilities, such as: Inland Revenue, Meat Board, local councils, Overseas Investment Office, Accident Compensation Corporation, Environment Risk Management Authority, Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Pork Industry Board.

Breaking into our homes, planting spy cameras and spying on us for 3 days without a warrant is a power we should never hand over to the bloody Police!

Police to be given right to spy
Police will be able to use wireless video cameras to spy on crime suspects in their homes for up to three months, as a result of an impending law change and technological advances. Police will normally be required to get a "surveillance device warrant" to monitor people in situations in which they might have a "reasonable expectation of privacy", such as in their homes and offices. But they could conduct surveillance for up to three days without a warrant in "certain urgent or emergency situations". Cecil Averill, chief executive of Napier telco Airnet, says battery-powered "keyhole" cameras that sent encrypted video images back over wireless broadband links could be effectively concealed in homes, but police would need training to install them.

Come on NZ, I know John Key is charming and optimistic and aspirational, but you can see can’t you that these new surveillance powers are powers the state should not be allowed to have over us right? Don’t let National and ACT ram this through in the way they’ve rammed through letting the Police take your DNA to build a DNA data bank on a mere arrest.

Forcing NZers to answer questions robs us of the right to silence, don't be so naive to think that the Police will only aim this power at criminals, don't wash your hands of this issue by pretending that it doesn't impact on you because you don't commit crime. Police power MUST have checks and balances, allowing them to break into your home and bug you for 3 days without a warrant DOES NOT MAKE US SAFER, and why the hell would we want other Government Departments to have such intrusive powers as well?


Join the Stop The Search and Surveillance Bill Facebook Group now