Controversial wiretapping legislation…

Oct 22, 2008 News

---

Telecommunication companies presently incapable of compliance

…will require enormous investments

The Guyana Telephone and Telegraph Company (GT&T) is at present incapable of complying with the recently approved Interception of Communication Bill 2008 that legalizes the tapping of telephones, along with the interception of digital messages and internet traffic.
This is according to a senior official at the largest telephone company in Guyana, who noted that in Jamaica, the equipment used to intercept mobile calls costs in the vicinity of US$800,000 and for the other requirements, “that is a whole other ball park.”
The official did confirm that there were consultations with the government prior to the tabling and eventual passage of the legislation and there was a tentative preparedness to assist the company financially.
To date, there has been no solid commitment by the government to help the company.
It was posited that the Bill should have been sent to a parliamentary committee where it would have endured a lot more scrutiny.
The official expressed surprise with the pace at which the legislation passed through the National Assembly, explaining that were the President to assent to the Bill today and it were to be published in the Gazette the following day, thereby making it law, should a warrant be issued to tap a phone the company could not adhere to the law.
And if the company did not promptly adhere to the law it would be in violation of the Act and be liable to a fine not exceeding $1M and other punitive actions.
However, according to the legislation that was passed, “If a judge issuing a warrant under this Act is satisfied that the operation of a public or private telecommunications system has failed to comply with the warrant for want of any support services for the transmission, switching equipment or any other technical facility or requirement, he may direct that the owner, operator or licensee of the telecommunications system shall, at his own cost, forthwith provide the required support service, install necessary switching equipment or provide the technical facility or requirement, as the case may be, for complying with the warrant to the satisfaction of the Court and the compliance with this subsection shall be deemed to be a condition in the licence granted for the operation of the telecommunication system.”
The piece of legislation stipulates that interception is defined as the monitoring of transmissions made by fibre optic cable or any other form of wire line by wireless telegraphy, voice over internet protocol, internet and all other forms of electromagnetic communications to or from the apparatus comprising the systems.
When contacted last evening, a senior staffer who spoke on the basis of anonymity said that Digicel, at present, was also incapable of intercepting mobile calls, or storing and retrieving at a later date.
It was also noted that at present there were no ongoing discussions on just how much money was required for investment to make intercepting a reality.
The controversial Interception of Communication Bill that seeks to legalize what is commonly referred to as wiretapping was passed in the National Assembly on Friday last despite staunch opposition.
The legislation which was debated for hours on end in the House saw the Bill being condemned as suspicious and unconstitutional, but according to Minister of Home Affairs Clement Rohee who tabled the Bill, there was no need for paranoid concerns, given that the legislation was laden with safeguard clauses.
The legislation, when enacted, will give the power to the Commissioner of Police, the Chief of Staff of the Guyana Defence Force, and the Commissioner General of the Guyana Revenue Authority to apply to a Judge to direct the technical officers at the telecommunication companies, namely GT&T and Digicel, to intercept the communication of a person without his/her knowledge.
In an emergency, and in instances where 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 wiretap in instances where it is impracticable to reach a Judge and deemed an emergency.
According to Rohee, crime has evolved in sync with technology and as such there needs to be 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 activity.
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.
Corbin also argued in vain 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 huge 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 telecommunication companies, they do not posses the capacity to adequately intercept information.
He added that as such the state should help the companies pay for the technology.
Leader of the Alliance For Change, Raphael Trotman, who opposed the legislation, had also questioned the haste with which the Government was seeking to legalize wiretapping in Guyana, pointing 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?”

---

---