|
The ''Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment (Data Retention) Bill 2015'' (Bill) amends the ''Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979'' (TIA Act) and the ''Telecommunications Act 1997''(The Telecommunications Act),to introduce a statutory obligation for Australian telecommunication service providers to retain, for a period of two years, particular types of telecommunications data (metadata) and introduces certain reforms to the regimes applying to the access of stored communications and telecommunications data under the TIA Act. On 13 April 2015, the Data Retention Bill (2015) received Royal Assent and is now referred to as the ''Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment (Data Retention) Act 2015'' (the Act). The Act is recognized as the third tranche of national security legislation passed by the Australian Parliament since September 2014. Pursuant to s 187AA, the following types of information will need to be retained by telecommunication service providers: Phone Calls * Incoming caller identification * Outgoing caller identification * The date, time and duration of a phone call * The location of the device from which it was made * The unique identifier number assigned to a particular mobile phone Internet * The email address from which an email is sent. * The time, date and recipients of emails. * The size of any attachment sent with emails and their file formats * Account details held by the Internet Service Provider (ISP) such as whether or not the account has been activated or suspended. The content or the substance of a communication is not considered to be metadata and will not be stored. Twenty-two agencies, including, the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO), state police forces, the Australian Crime Commission, the Australian Taxation Office and the NSW Independent Commission against Corruption (ICAC) will be able to view store metadata without a warrant. The only exception is the metadata of those defined under the Act as journalists. Under a concession driven by the opposition Australian Labor Party, agencies will need to seek a warrant before a judicial officer before they are able to view the metadata whilst ASIO will need to seek permission of the Attorney General. The decision by the Abbott Government to introduce a mandatory telecommunications data regime into Australia led to considerable debate within the community. Supported by Australia’s law enforcement and national security agencies, including the Australian Federal Police and the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO), who argue that telecommunications data is critical to criminal investigations and that is only through legislation that they can be assured that it will be available, the Act was opposed by a wide range of groups and individuals including journalists, human rights organizations and civil liberties groups. Their objections to the installment of a mandatory data regime are based on a number of different arguments such as the consequences for journalism and journalistic practice, the non-proportionate and increasing encroachment of the privacy of Australia’s population and the effectiveness of the regime as a tool to combat crime. Questions over its cost and the consequences for the telecommunications industry, in particular small to medium-sized providers, have also been raised as arguments against the mandatory detention of data. Whilst the Act is law, telecommunications and Internet service providers have grace period of 18 months in which they are to improve their systems and establish to processes to comply with the legislation. Whilst Telstra has indicated that it will store the data that it retains within Australia, Telcos and Internet service providers (ISPs) are not obligated to do so under the law. == Background == The Australian Government’s interest in establishing a telecommunications data retention scheme can be dated back to at least June 2010, when media outlets including the Sydney Morning Herald and ZD Net reported that the government was considering such a proposal. On 4 May 2012, the Government then led by Julia Gillard announced plans to review via public consultation a range of national security legislation, including that which is covered "lawful access to telecommunications… to ensure that vital investigative tools are not lost as telecommunications providers change their business practices and begin to delete data more regularly." In July 2012, the Attorney- General’s Department released, "Equipping Australia against Emerging and Evolving Threats," a discussion paper focused on the proposed national security reforms. The first chapter of this paper outlined the terms of reference for an inquiry to be conducted by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security (PJCIS) into the potential reform of National Security legislation, specifically the four following Acts:〔 * Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 * Telecommunications Act 1997 * Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979 * Intelligence Services Act 2001 The Discussion paper grouped these proposals into three different categories: those that the Government wished to progress, that the Government was considering and those on which the Government was seeking the opinion of the Committee. Despite the paper containing eighteen proposals and forty-one individual reforms, the suggestion that carriage service providers (CSPs) be required to retain information on the way in which Australians use the Internet and their mobile telephones, elicited much consternation and comment from the community. This was a point that the Parliamentary Committee highlighted in its final report to the Government: "The potential data retention regime attracted a large amount of criticism and comment from organizations and concerned individuals. These organizations and individuals generally considered any potential data retention regime a significant risk to both the security of their privacy. In addition to these general comments, the Committee received a large volume of form letter correspondence." On 24 June 2013, the Committee issued its report and put the decision on whether to progress with a mandatory data retention scheme back in the hands of the Government. On same day that the report was released, former Attorney General Mark Dreyfus announced that the Government would not be pursuing its proposal. On 30 October 2014, the Australian Government, led by Tony Abbott, introduced the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment (Data Retention) Bill 2014 into the House of Representatives. On 21 November 2014, the Attorney- General, Senator George Brandis, wrote to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, referring the provisions of the Bill for inquiry. Chaired by Dan Tehan, the Member for Wannon, the Committee received 204 submissions, 31 supplementary submissions and held three public hearings. On 27 February 2015, the Committee presented their report, containing 39 recommendations to the Government. On 3 March 2015, the Government announced that it would be accepting all the recommendations of the Committee. This however, was not sufficient to satisfy the concerns of the opposition Labor Party, who only agreed to support the passage of the Bill through the Senate after amendments were made to protect journalistic sources. On 26 March 2015, the Senate voted in favour of the Bill. On 13 April 2015, the Governor-General gave his royal ascent and the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment (Data Retention) Act 2015 entered into law. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment (Data Retention) Act 2015」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|