►
Views on proposed privacy offences being sought
The Privacy Sub-committee of the Law Reform Commission today (Tuesday) published a consultation paper on "Regulating Surveillance and Interception of Communications".
The Sub-committee, whose chairman is the Hon Mr. Justice Mortimer, Justice of Appeal, consider that there is an increasing need for privacy and security of telecommunications. They conclude that with increasingly sophisticated technology, existing laws need to be updated to provide adequate and effective protection to the privacy of communications and safeguards against arbitrary or unlawful interference with a person's privacy or correspondence.
The Sub-committee believe that physical surveillance is a sufficiently serious intrusion into a person's privacy to warrant the use of criminal sanctions, and they recommend the creation of three criminal offences along the following lines:
entering private premises as a trespasser with intent to observe, overhear or obtain personal information therein;
placing or using in private premises a sense-enhancing, transmitting or recording device without the consent of the lawful occupier; and
placing or using a sense-enhancing, transmitting or recording device outside private premises with the intention of monitoring the activities of the occupant without the consent of the lawful occupier.
As regards interception of communications, the Sub-committee agree that the integrity of the public communications systems should be protected. They recommend that it should be an offence intentionally to intercept or interfere with a communication transmitted by a mail or telecommunications system.
As the Sub-committee consider that private communications should also be protected, they recommend that it should be an offence intentionally to intercept or interfere with a communication by means of a technical device, whether or not the communication itself is mediated by means of such a device. However, this offence should be subject to a proviso that the interception concerned could not have been effected without the use of a device. This is to exclude communications which could in any event be casually overheard by a third party.