The Australian Parliament has passed comprehensive legislation allowing authorities from the Australian Federal Police and the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission to target suspected criminals online.
The legislation received bipartisan support during its passage through the chamber.
According to the Australian Federal Court, the Identify and Disrupt bill was passed through the Senate on August 25. The bill introduces three new warrants that allow authorities to take extraordinary action against suspected cybercriminals.
New warrants allow authorities to hack into the personal computers and networks of suspected criminals in order to seize control of their internet accounts and identities, as well as to interrupt their data transmissions.
Karen Andrews, the Minister for Home Affairs, has hailed the broadening of the tools available to Australian police in the fight against cyber criminals.
According to her, the AFP will have additional powers to pursue organized crime gangs to keep drugs off our streets and out of our communities, as well as those who conduct the most horrific crimes against children, as a result of the reforms.
While both the government and the opposition supported the legislation, Senator Lidia Thorpe of the Greens, a minor political party, criticized it for hastening Australia’s march toward becoming a “surveillance state,” claiming that the bill “hastens Australia’s march toward becoming a surveillance state.”
“In effect, this Bill would allow spy agencies to modify, copy, or delete your data with a data disruption warrant; collect intelligence on your online activities with a network activity warrant; also they can take over your social media and other online accounts and profiles with an account takeover warrant.”
“What’s worse, the data disruption and network activity warrant could be issued by a member of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal […] It is outrageous that these warrants won’t come from a judge of a superior court,” she added.
However, despite the fact that 60 adjustments to the statute were made as a result of recommendations by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security (PJCIS), only ten of the security committee’s 33 recommendations were implemented.
A number of amendments have been introduced to the law to tighten regulatory oversight of the new measures, including strengthened protections for journalists, and to ensure that the additional powers are phased out within five years.
The Act, on the other hand, did not include provisions requiring warrants to be approved only by a court of law.
It was also recommended that warrants for offenses against national security, such as money laundering and severe narcotics trafficking, as well as weapons and criminal association violations and crimes against humanity, be limited in scope.
Nevertheless, the finalized draft does not include any revisions that would narrow the scope of criminal charges in this manner.
The administration has committed to revisiting the recommendations of the PJCIS as part of a comprehensive overhaul of the intelligence surveillance infrastructure.
“While we support the bill […] safeguards in this bill could go further, particularly in relation to the offenses this bill applies to.”
