Australian Privacy Foundation

The Australian Privacy Foundation is the main non-governmental organisation dedicated to protecting the privacy rights of Australians. The Foundation aims to focus public attention on emerging issues which pose a threat to the freedom and privacy of Australians. The Foundation has led the defence of the rights of individuals to control their personal information and to be free of excessive intrusions. The Foundation uses the Australian Privacy Charter as a benchmark against which laws, regulations and privacy invasive initiatives can be assessed. For information about the Foundation and the Charter, see www.privacy.org.au

The Foundation’s believes that the adoption of encrypted digital communications technology by the Queensland Police Service would bring an incidental benefit for the privacy of individuals.

The historical ability of the media, and the public in general, to listen in to police radio communications would seem to be the result of technological factors rather than any conscious public policy decision.

Many operational police communications will necessarily contain personal information about members of the public – including informants, alleged offenders and witnesses, as well as personal information about members of the police service.

The latter information will be about members of the police service in the course of their duties and we would not regard their privacy interests as outweighing the public interest in scrutiny of police operations.

But information about members of the public will often be of a sensitive nature, and in some cases could even put individuals at risk.

We believe that the individual members of the public mentioned in police radio communications are entitled to a presumption of privacy, and the adoption of secure communications is therefore welcome from a privacy perspective.

This result would also be consistent with Information Privacy Principles adopted by the Queensland government through Information Standard 42 in 2001. IPP 10 requires that subject to certain exceptions, personal information should only be used for the purpose for which it is obtained, while IPP11 limits disclosure. In the case of Police operations, unrestricted disclosure to the public and media is clearly not one of the purposes for which personal information is collected, and none of the permitted grounds for disclosure in IPP11 would apply.

We do however share concerns that secure communications will remove an important element of public accountability for police operations. We suggest that consideration be given to alternative ways of providing this accountability. This should include access to recordings and clear transcripts of all police communications being freely available to an independent monitor.

A policy should also be developed on controlled access to records of radio communications by recognised news media, to include a protocol on appropriate editing to protect incidental personal details. It may be that in specific cases, the public interest in accountability would justify release of unedited recordings or transcripts, but in the majority of routine communications, incidental personal information about members of the public should be withheld.

End.

For further information please contact:

Nigel Waters, Board Member and Policy Coordinator
Australian Privacy Foundation
Phone: 02 4981 0828 and 0407 230342
E-mail: nigelwaters@iprimus.com.au
APF Web site: http://www.privacy.org.au

The Australian Privacy Foundation

Submission