[Peetwo]

BOHICA – syndrome.

“CASA sometimes accesses telecommunications data when it conducts an investigation into whether a person contravened a criminal offence provision in the aviation legislation,” a spokesperson for the organisation said.

This statement both amuses and troubles.  Simply put CASA are NOT ‘the Police’ and their investigators DO NOT have the authority, the constraints, the checks and balance nor rules for conducting ‘an investigation’ the Police do.  If every item in the Regulation is to  be a ‘criminal’ offence, then the allegation of ‘criminal behaviour’ should be investigated by trained, authorised police and a case provided to the CDPP.  The ‘evidence’ CASA use in their ‘kangaroo’ court system or in proceedings at the ever obliging AAT is often anything but impartial and there are many cases – on record – where CASA have been economical with truth and fanciful with ‘evidence’.  

I have no quarrel with the AFP investigating a matter; I have even less of a problem with a clearly cut, properly investigated alleged ‘crime’ being taken to court and tested, under proper rules which protect both the ‘investigator’ and the accused.  But I do have a problem with the twisted, biased use of ‘law’ to bend an allegation in CASA’s favour, when a halfwit FOI decides a matter is criminal and wants to stalk a victim through cyber-space.

The legislation initially restricted access to police and anti-corruption organisations, customs, the Australian Crime Commission, the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission.

Furry muff - For law and security agencies this notion of using Metadata needs a legal framework – but do ‘civilian’ agencies like CASA or ATSB need that level of access – No, they should need to apply for a warrant and have responsible, properly governed agencies do the ‘digging’.

CASA is not the police force – despite attempts to be so – they are a regulator with powers to investigate; once they dream up a case it should be passed on to the impartial grown ups, who have a right to access your private, personal data.

Reading, from the - SMH -  and  - WIKI.

Toot toot.

Latest on this story from Hitch off the Yaffa... :

CASA has accessed mobile phone data in the past, but recent changes to the laws will prevent them from doing so in the future. (Composite image: Steve Hitchen)



New Laws ban CASA from accessing Mobile Phone Data
10 Dec 2015

Recent changes to the federal telecom laws will prevent the Civil Aviation Safety Authority from accessing mobile phone data in the future.

Amendments to the Telecommunications (Intercept and Access) Act mean that CASA will no longer be able to use data from private phone calls in enforcement action.

CASA made 11 applications for historical data in the 2014-15 period, which has enraged sections of the aviation community.

"The TIA Act permits enforcement agencies to authorise telecommunications carriers to disclose telecommunications data where that information was reasonably necessary for the enforcement of the criminal law, a law imposing a pecuniary penalty, or the protection of the public revenue," a CASA spokesperson had said in response to queries from Australian Flying.

"CASA makes applications during some investigations into whether a person has contravened a criminal offence provision in the aviation legislation."

The type of information CASA applied for was telephone account holder names and call records (information about telephone calls made, how long people talked to each other). CASA could not access the actual content of the phone calls.

However, CASA confirmed late today that under the changes to the TIA that came into effect earlier this year, they wouldn't have access to even those records any more.

The TIA amendments have limited the agencies that can apply for data to 14 criminal law enforcement agencies only, but there is provision for more to be added under ministerial declaration.

Ok so why does the Hitch post not give me a warm fuzzy feeling, when I think about the CASA confirmation given later in the day...

KC (AMROBA) explains it best:

"..Is CASA Australia’s Aviation Regulator or does it have an internal vision of being like one of the above?

Australia has created aviation requirements that are being prosecuted by a Regulator with a fixation on policing breaches of the criminal provisions they have created.

Aviation safety cannot be regulated into people as aviation safety relies on the safety culture of participants.

If CASA need access to metadata for ‘criminal’ offense then the Feds should be handling the offense.

This sought of dampens all the PR from CASA about working with industry.

This is a big brother mentality that does not improve trust or confidence in CASA.."

MTF..P2