House passes ‘spy’ legislation, opposition cite constitutional violations

Oct 18, 2008 News

---

The controversial Interception of Communication Bill, which seeks to legalise what is commonly referred to as wiretapping, was passed in the National Assembly despite staunch opposition to the Bill.

The legislation, which was debated for hours on end in the House, saw the Bill being condemned as suspicious and unconstitutional.

Minister of Home Affairs Clement Rohee, who tabled the Bill, said that there was no need for paranoid concerns, given that the legislation was laden with safeguard clauses.

He sought to allay the fears that were raised recently, wherein the security of the technical officer conducting the actual interception of information may be in jeopardy.

According to Rohee, an amendment to the legislation will have the person, when tendering the information as evidence, conduct his testimony in camera, meaning that the person will not be exposed to the public.

When enacted, the legislation will give to the Commissioner of Police, the Chief of Staff of the Guyana Defence Force, and the Commissioner General of the Guyana Revenue Authority the power to apply to a judge to direct the technical officers at the telecommunications company, namely GT&T and Digicel, to intercept the communication of a person/s without his/her/their knowledge.

In an emergency and in instances deemed a matter of national security, the authorities can move to have a warrant sought for by the Minister of Home Affairs, after which he will have 72 hours to present the application.

There is also a clause in the legislation that allows for a designated officer to order a wire tap in instances where it is impracticable to reach a judge but is deemed an emergency.

According to Rohee, who tabled the legislation, crime has evolved in sync with technology, and as such there needs to have the tools in place for the law enforcement agencies to be in a position to maintain the pace with which the technology is being used in criminal activities.

“We would be backward not to take advantage of it,” said Rohee.

He insisted that, at all stages of the process, confidentiality will be the watchword, but this was denounced by leader of the main opposition party, Robert Corbin, who said that every day in the media there is information that should have been confidential but was leaked to the press.

Rohee insisted that at no time will there be a disclosure that a tap has been ordered, but it was argued that this meant that someone’s phone could be tapped and that person would never know it, if the information were not to be used against that person.

Corbin condemned the Bill, saying that the constitution has been violated and trampled upon for years, and that the safeguards in the Bill were meaningless in light of the repeated flagrant violations.

“Wiretapping in law is illegal, yet we saw a Commissioner of Police’s phone being tapped.”

Corbin also said that the Bill was suspicious, and in the context of the present administration, it was dangerous to give such power to the current administration.

He also noted that the legislation was also imposing onerous obligations to not only comply in illegalities, but to invest hue amounts of money to be able to facilitate the interception, given that they must promptly intercept when the order is passed.

According to Corbin, based on his consultations with the telecommunications companies, they do not possess the capacity to adequately intercept information.

He added that, as such, the state should help the companies pay for the technology.

“If the Government is serious about wiretapping for national security, then it must demonstrate a track record of trust.”

Leader of the Alliance For Change, Raphael Trotman, who opposed the legislation, said that he was confident that the Bill will be made into law.

The party leader also questioned the haste with which the Government was seeking to legalise wiretapping in Guyana. He pointed to the fact that, when the idea was conceived by CARICOM Heads, it was for a common approach.

He said that as far as he is aware, there is no other CARICOM country that has even started to draft any such piece of legislation, and to the best of his knowledge he was unaware that any regional drafting body was involved in drafting the one that was approved.

“Crime must be suppressed and technology must be used, but it has to be balanced with rights.”

Trotman also voiced his disapproval for parts of the legislation that obligated officers in the telecommunications sector to “either become a spy for Government or be punished.”

He also alluded to the fact that there was no apparatus in place for oversight or monitoring of the use of the wiretapping. “Public trust with the police is at an all-time low. Who will police the police?” he asked.

 

 

---

---