Archive
Citizens vs the Rogue Deep State
.
.
Blogger Martyn Bradbury has won his case against unreasonable search and surveillance against the NZ Police; and subsequent Police attempts to produce evidence in secrecy, in a closed Court.
His case highlights a disturbing growing trend in Aotearoa New Zealand for State power to be used against anyone who has “run foul” of The Establishment:
- 2009: An attack by then Welfare Minister, Paula Bennett, against two solo-mothers who criticised National’s social welfare policies. Ms Bennett released personal information pertaining to the two women’s financial circumstances to silence their criticism. Ms Bennett’s actions were deemed to have been a breach of their privacy.
- 2011: Police searched several media offices during the “Teapot Tapes” controversy. Radio NZ’s Don Rood said Radio NZ would refuse to hand over any material that might compromise anonymous sources.
- 2014: The illegal search and seizure of Nicky Hager’s property as retribution for his investigation into the close links between a far-right blogger and the National Party. Police were attempting to uncover the identity of the whistle-blower known as “Rawshark”. The search (and seizure of property) of Mr Hager’s home was later deemed unlawful.
- 2017: The leaking of Winston Peters’ superannuation details as part of a patently obvious political dirty tricks campaign. Senior civil servants passed on details to then-Ministers Paula Bennett and Anne Tolley – the latter admitting in Court to disclosing those details to others. Mr Peters’ case was then leaked to the media prior to the 2017 General Election, ostensibly to destroy his political career and his party’s chances for re-election. The case is currently on-going.
This illustrates why so many New Zealanders – including the dogged John Campbell through his former programme, ‘Campbell Live’ – were 100% justified in opposing increasing the surveillance powers of the GCSB, SIS, Police, and god knows who else.
.
.
The abuse of State agencies’ power – already considerable – showed how warranted our fears were. And still are.
It is why I made a submission in 2013 to the Justice Select committee on the GCSB Bill (which would permit surveillance of New Zealanders in our own country) should not only stop – but that the powers of the GCSB should be re-set to those of 1977. Then a full public enquiry held to determine what, if any, changes really needed to be made.
I still believe this more than ever to be necessary.
Secondly, the so-called Police apology to Martyn Bradbury is notable for an appalling part of their statement;
.
.
“Police apologise for the stress and other psychological harm caused to you by virtue of YOUR INVOLVEMENT in this investigation.” [My emphasis.]
That is insulting phaseology and is a sly suggestion that blame continues to lie with Martyn Bradbury. It strongly suggests that Police hierarchy have yet to fully comprehend the nature of their abuse of power.
Additionally, there was also financial and reputational harm caused to Martyn by Police abuse of their power. It is now clear that he was denied bank loans as a direct consequence of improper Police activity.
The appropriate phrasing should have been;
“Police apologise for the financial, reputational, stress, and other psychological harm caused to you by virtue of our over-zealous actions that inappropriately involved you in our investigation.”
That phrasing would be accepting responsibility. The original wording barely achieves that.
Lastly, someone authorised this illegal activity. Those individual(s) are still in positions of authority within the New Zealand Police. They still wield power – unbridled power.
I find that troubling in the extreme.
There must be resignation(s) from the Police force. Someone must be held to account.
Just as the rest of us are, under the law.
Famous Last Words
From Parliament, on 27 March 2003, when the Government Communications Security Bureau Bill was being debated;
“This is a good bill. I do not accept the criticism of those who speak against it, that somehow it means that information about people will be gathered improperly…” – Peter Dunne, then-MP and leader of the United Future Party, speaking on behalf of a Bill to extend the power of the GCSB
Media Reporting
Perhaps even more shameful than Police behaviour has been that of the Fourth Estate reporting this issue to the public. Search engine checks (and confirmation by Martyn Bradbury) have both confirmed that only the NZ Herald and Magic Talk radio have reported the outcome of this case and the Police backdown and apology. The Herald article is pay-walled and consequently of little use to non-subscribers.
The Police abuse of power and the gross invasion of Martyn Bradbury’s private life could happen to any of us. But you wouldn’t know it going by the Total Media Blackout at TVNZ, Mediaworks/TV3, Fairfax/Stuff, and even sadly – Radio NZ.
Perhaps if TV3, TVNZ, et al, had reported less of the gruesome details of two current murder court cases, the public of Aotearoa New Zealand might be more informed on one of the most important civil rights cases in recent years.
Imagine if every mainstream media devoted the same scrutiny and reporting of Martyn Bradbury’s civil rights case against the police as they did to Grace Millane’s drinking on the night leading up to her demise.
We might be a very well-informed nation indeed. Sadly that is not the reality.
We have been let down badly by those empowered to preserve the law, and by those we entrust to speak truth to power. The media are supposedly tasked to shine a light on events that are of crucial importance to society; to the people; and to every individual.The freedom of the Fourth Estate is critical, they keep telling us, as a bulwark against State excess; to promote openness; and to hold those in power accountable.
They utterly failed us.
.
“The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance.”
– John Philpot Curran (24 July 1750 – 14 October 1817)
.
.
.
References
The Daily Blog: 5 years and finally justice – NZ Police formally apologise & settle for breaching my civil rights
The Daily Blog: My case against a secret NZ Police investigation that breached my privacy and my civil rights
The Daily Blog: Kafka’s Shadow – My hearing against NZ Police & secret trials
Fairfax/Stuff media: Paula Bennett accused of Muldoon-style bullying
Fairfax/Stuff media: Bennett won’t rule out releasing beneficiary details
NZ Herald: TV3 searched over teapot tape
Fairfax/Stuff media: Radio NZ hands over ‘tea tape’ interview
Radio NZ: Anne Tolley admits ‘outburst’ in Winston Peters superannuation case
Mediaworks/Newshub: Police accessed blogger’s bank records unlawfully – report
Parliament: Hansards – Government Communications Security Bureau Bill – Third Reading
NZ Herald: ‘Bomber’ Bradbury gets apology from police after exploit used to access bank records, driving him to the edge
Previous related blogposts
The GCSB Act – Tracy Watkins gets it right
The secret closed trials of Soviet Russia. (And Aotearoa New Zealand)
.
.
.
.
This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 11 November 2019.
.
.
= fs =
I spy with my multitude of Eyes
.
.
Several pieces of legislation enacted under the previous government saw a vast increase in State surveillance. The GCSB – first created in 1977 by former National PM, Robert Muldoon, – was initially set up to provide overseas surveillance during the Cold War era.
By May 2013, the powers of the GCSB were extended to permit domestic surveillance of New Zealanders by former National PM, John Key.
A variety of state “security” and extensions of surveillance powers have been enacted over the past sixteen years;
Labour:
National:
Search and Surveillance Act 2012
Countering Terrorist Fighters Legislation Bill (aka Customs and Excise Amendment Act 2014)
Not to be outdone, the private sector also dabbles with surveillance. On most occassions, that surveillance is subtle.
In other instances, it is overt and in-your-face.
An example of this is the recently (and currently on-going) re-developement at Kilbirnie Pak N Save supermarket in Wellington’s Eastern suburb. The store’s internal up-grade has included the sprouting of dozens of security cameras. In some areas, the high-security of CCTV cameras, descending from the ceiling on poles – eerily like some mutant upside-down mushroom – would be more appropriate for a top secret military installation.
Upon entering the store, the first camera is apparent;
.
Foyer at Kilbirnie Pak N Save
.
Walking through the turn-styles, into the first part of the super-market – more cameras;
.
.
The Fruit & Vege section;
.
.
Meats…
.
.
Chilled goods, heading toward the Deli and Bakery;
.
.
The Bakery section…
.
.
Down the side of the building (greeting cards, breads, et al)…
.
.
And a close-up of the all-seeing eyes…
.
.
Until we reach the check-out – and the ubiquitous cameras become a parody of surveillance as their numbers become apparent;
.
.
.
In case the reader has difficulty making out the individual cameras, they are highlighted here;
.
.
Even banks don’t have as many cameras.
In an age of tracking by online corporations like Google and Facebook; by the apps in our smartphones; by CCTVs in buildings, streets, offices, etc – we have reached a surveillance state far surpassing anything envisioned by George Orwell.
Some of us will recall the days of the friendly corner grocer;
.
Acknowledgement: Wairarapa Times-Age
.
Once upon a time, retailers functioned with not a camera in sight;
.
Acknowledgement: NZ Herald
.
Those days now seem long gone.
Perhaps this is the price of “progress”?
Ironically, the advent of the Surveillance State and Surveilled Society has been long foreseen by academics, writers, activists, etc. As surveillance increased – both State and commercial – the public became more and more inured to every-present prying eyes.
The constant warnings of encroachments into our privacy; against increasing State power; alerting us to the perils of Big Data held by offshore (and domestic) corporations have become a Cry Wolf! to most of the public. Unless you are a left-wing blogger or investigative journalist who become an irritant to The Established Order, the public perceive no threat to their glacial erosion of our privacy.
Couched in terms of “preserving law and order” and/or “fighting terrorism”, people will think little of our own country as a Surveilled Society. Especially if they perceive no “down side” to their personal liberty. Previous warnings of a Big Brother State have – apparently – not become reality.
Like the frog-in-the-pan-of-heating-water fable, fears gradually gave way to blasé acceptance. We have arrived to a society where the presence of literally dozens of overhead surveillance cameras in a supermarket now barely raises an eyebrow.
.
.
.
References
Wikipedia: GCSB – History
Parliament: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill
Wairarapa Times-Age: First class First St grocer
NZ Herald: (story removed from website)
NZ Law Society: Privacy Commissioner issues guidance on personal information and transparency reporting
Fairfax media: Police apologise to Nicky Hager over Dirty Politics raid as part of settlement
Previous related blogposts
Surveillance laws, Strikebreaking, & Subversive groups
2013 – The Year We Became a Policed Surveillance State
The Growth of State Power; mass surveillance; and it’s supporters
Copyright (c) Notice
All images stamped ‘fmacskasy.wordpress.com – thedailyblog.co.nz’ are freely available to be used, with following provisos,
» Use must be for non-commercial purposes.
» Where purpose of use is commercial, a donation to Child Poverty Action Group is requested.
» At all times, images must be used only in context, and not to denigrate individuals or groups.
» Acknowledgement of source is requested.
.
.
.
.
This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 9 September 2018.
.
.
= fs =
Big Bro’ is Watching You!
.
.
This piece by Dita DeBoni on TVNZ’s website is worth re-posting in it’s entirety – just in case it ‘mysteriously vanishes’ into the ether. Not that I’m implying the New Zealand is now more-or-less a quasi-Police State…
.
Whether it be information about our household digital television account, or my child’s ear infection medication, or a text message, say, sent by a Prime Minister to a highly prominent sportsman or blogger, “privacy” is often the reason trotted out for stonewalling.
Sometimes it’s legitimate. Goodness knows what might happen if a complete stranger paid my household bills for me, or felt inclined to impersonate me at the chemist.
And do we really need to know that the Prime Minister and prominent All Blacks are in cahoots over the new flag design?
Some might say yes, but I reckon I could have figured that out by the sheer number of photographs we’re subjected to day after day featuring them gazing adoringly into each other’s eyes.
It seems the main reason a journalist – or even a citizen – is denied ‘official’ information much of the time is either that releasing it is going to unleash a torrent of (metaphorical) excrement, or getting the information you’re after would be a pain in the posterior for the person being asked for it.
Advertisement
The exception to this is if the police are asking.
It now seems as though certain institutions are more than happy to hand over incredibly personal financial and other information if the plod request it, even if they’ve skipped the part where they’re supposed to get the proper legal documentation to do so.
Some institutions actually wait for a formal, legitimate request before complying with police fishing expeditions.
Others, notably Westpac Bank, do not.
We know this because it emerged this week that Westpac handed over 10 months of data from three of author Nicky Hager’s accounts when police were investigating the hacking of Cameron Slater’s blog and social media accounts at the end of 2014, willingly complying with detectives who simply explained it was part of their investigation into ‘criminal offending’.
There is nothing whatsoever to suggest the criminal offending they were investigating was anything to do with Nicky Hager.
Hager began the investigation as a ‘suspect’ but became simply a ‘witness’; he is not accused of stealing anything.
He did what good journalists do on a daily basis – was given information on nefarious wrong-doing that he believed the public needed to know. Then he published it.
Advertisement
He’s been treated extraordinarily for a witness in such a case – had his house raided for ten hours, had personal files uplifted, been wire-tapped, had his records requested from as many as 20 different companies and sources, and been vilified by the government.
But whether you like Nicky Hager or not, whether you agree with what he set out to do or not, there is something rotten about the way the police acted in the case – and something profoundly out of order about the way Westpac Bank rolled over and gave away Hager’s bank records and other personal information on the strength of an unsupported request by police, without even telling their client they were doing so – which is also something they are required to do.
It now emerges Nicky Hager has complained to the Privacy Commissioner about what’s happened and also wants a ‘full and frank’ disclosure from Westpac.
It will be more than anyone else has had. Westpac say they won’t comment on what they do with customer information because it’s an ‘internal policy’.
Again, you may think Nicky Hager deserved the treatment he’s had. You may not agree with him in general.
But remember that whatever treatment’s been handed out to him can be handed out to anyone with the ‘wrong’ connections, the ‘wrong’ information, and the ‘wrong’ intentions.
Privacy increasingly seems to be only your right if you are on the ‘right’ side.
In case anyone has missed the point, Dita DeBoni’s column is a direct warning to the citizens of this country.
When the security apparatus of the State – in this case the New Zealand Police – can access private and confidential details without a search warrant, then we have reached a truly frightening stage in our nation’s developing history.
The only place where police have had such unimpeded access to the private information of citizens has been – up until now – the province of military junta-controlled regimes; Soviet-style “people’s republics”; and various banana republic dictatorships. Think of Stalin, Pol Pot, Idi Amin, Pinochet, Papa “Doc” Duvalier – it’s a very long list. (And I haven’t even gone through the entire 20th century!)
Though New Zealand is not *yet* a One Party state – which is only one national “crisis away, before a “state of emergency” is declared – we have taken a further step toward the nightmarish society envisioned by C.K. Stead in “Smith’s Dream/Sleeping Dogs“. (That nice man, Prime Minister Volkner, had such a horrid time caused by those nasty terrorists. Why couldn’t they just all get a proper job?)
It might well be that the release of Nicky Hager’s private information to the police was an inadvertent slip-up by an ill-informed Westpac employee. Or it could be that there is now a nascent culture developing in New Zealand of fawning, unquestioning obeisance to Authority.
In a space of thirtythree years, we have gone from massive street protests and struggle against an increasingly authoritarian National government led by Robert Mudoon – to meekly accepting increasing State surveillance and seizure powers.
And in just seven years, we have gone from this;
.
.
– to this;
.
.
Yes, in just under a decade, National has taken New Zealand from complaining about reduced shower flows and ecologically-sound lightbulbs (!!) being “Nanny Statish” – to mass surveillance of the population; increased powers for spy agencies and police; forcing telco’s to keep client information for the State; and warrantless search and seizures.
In my youth, I visited my parents’ homeland whilst it was still under communist rule, and within the ‘sphere of influence’ of the Kremlin.
I can say, with a fair degree of confidence tinged with sadness, that New Zealand has moved closer to being a South Pacific replica of a former Soviet ‘satellite’ state. Only the Gulags are yet to be built. (Our Australian cuzzies have them already at Christmas Island and elsewhere.)
I can think of no other way to see this country. We have spy agencies monitoring New Zealanders; spying on our Pacific neighbours and trading partners; and harassing journalists who are critical of this government’s actions. Phil Goff’s political career was almost destroyed by National’s abuse of the powers of the SIS.
What else do you call a country where police can gain access to a citizen’s private information – without arresting him – and with no warrant? The term, I believe, is Police State.
If National Party supporters are “relaxed” about this, then I have this piece of advice for them; remember that governments change. Sooner or later, Labour will be in office.
And the Labour Prime Minister, with perhaps a few scores to settle, will have all the powers of search, surveillance, warrantless seizures, that John Key has gradually amassed since 2008.
Laws like these;
Search and Surveillance Act 2012
Countering Terrorist Fighters Legislation Bill (aka Customs and Excise Amendment Act 2014)
There may even be a new Minister for the GCSB and SIS. Perhaps Phil Goff. Or David Cunliffe.
Then the shoe will be on the other foot (the Left one). At that point, National and it’s supporters may start to regret the encroachment of State power into our lives.
I believe light bulbs and shower nozzles will be the least of their worries.
.
.
.
References
TVNZ: Dita DeBoni – Privacy right is not a right when not ‘right’
National Party: Showers latest target of Labour’s nanny state
NBR: Ferguson confirms ‘mass surveillance’, Key reiterates GCSB acting lawfully
NZ Herald: Warning as second part of spy bill passes
NBR: ‘Undemocratic’ Search and Surveillance Bill made law
Fairfax media: Spy bill passes into law amid wide criticism
Newstalk ZB: PM won’t confirm Pacific spying
Fairfax: Private data deserves greater respect than Westpac showed Nicky Hager
Techdirt: New Zealand Spy Agency Deleted Evidence About Its Illegal Spying On Kim Dotcom
Yahoo News: English didn’t know GCSB spied illegally
NZ Herald: GCSB report: 88 cases of possible illegal spying uncovered
Other Bloggers
Kiwipolitico: Confronting executive branch excess
Kiwipolitico: Some questions about the Stephenson case
No Right Turn: An unwarranted demand for information
No Right Turn: The banality of intrusion
The Daily Blog: Police plotted to arrest and spy on Nicky Hager – the most interesting parts of 1 year on from Dirty Politics
The Daily Blog: What mainstream haven’t mentioned about Westpac corporate narking on Nicky Hager
The Daily Blog: News release on behalf of Nicky Hager concerning privacy breach by Westpac
The Daily Blog: Why what the Police are doing to Nicky Hager is so extraordinary
The Standard: Technology and the law – and going after Hager
The Standard: Angry at Westpac
The Standard: Dirty Politics was in the public interest
The Standard: “A creeping authoritarianism from the current government”
Previous related blogposts
Parliamentary spies and games – some bad numbers
National Party president complains of covert filming – oh the rich irony!
National’s disdain for democracy and dissent
Welcome to new glorious People’s Republic of New Zealand
Today’s irony was brought to you courtesy of former ACT MP and Govt Minister, Rodney Hide
Weekend Revelations #2 – Michelle Boag has a whinge
.
.
.
.
This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 9 November 2015.
.
.
= fs =
Dom Post journos get it wrong – again!
.
.
Yet again, journalists who are experienced, professional, and supposedly well-informed have made a mistake about the pre-amended GCSB Bill. From the above article written by Tracy Watkins, Stacey Kirk, and Michael Fox stated,
The Government changed the law in the wake of revelations the GCSB may have spied illegally on more than 80 New Zealanders.
The law at that time supposedly prohibited them from doing so.
“Supposedly”?!
One. More. Time.
The GCSB Act 2003 was very specific in restricting the Bureau from spying on New Zealand citizens and permanent residents. Section 14 of the Act stated with unambiguous, crystal clarity;
14Interceptions not to target domestic communications
-
Neither the Director, nor an employee of the Bureau, nor a person acting on behalf of the Bureau may authorise or take any action for the purpose of intercepting the communications of a person (not being a foreign organisation or a foreign person) who is a New Zealand citizen or a permanent resident.
The law at the time could not have been any clearer. (Unless it was written in big red crayons!)
Key’s Official Party Line that the GCSB Act 2003 was “vague” or “flawed” was accepted almost without question by many journos too lazy to actually get on the internet and look up the law (as it stood at the time) for themselves.
There were exceptions though.
Audrey Young from the NZ Herald knew the Act very well, and said so in no uncertain terms;
The GCSB Act 2003 expressly forbids it from spying on the communications of New Zealanders.
But, by a series of snakes and ladders through the stated functions and objectives of the act, it convinced itself it was allowed to help the SIS and police spy on New Zealanders.
Another journo was Tracy Watkins from the Dominion Post;
“The GCSB’s interpretation of the law was so loose it managed to spy on 88 New Zealanders even though the law specifically stated it was not allowed to do so.”
The same Tracy Watkins who put her name to the more recent story above, “Key dismisses GCSB spying claims from Greenwald” which suggested “the law at that time supposedly prohibited them from doing so”.
I can only assume Ms Watkins did not read that part of the story before putting her name to it.
Sloppy work.
.
References
Fairfax media: Key dismisses GCSB spying claims from Greenwald
Legislation: Government Communications Security Bureau Act 2003
NZ Herald: Spying on NZ: More power to watch us
Dominion Post: Spy bungles start to entangle PM
Previous related blogposts
The GCSB Act – Tracy Watkins gets it right
.
Above image acknowledgment: Francis Owen/Lurch Left Memes
.
.
= fs =
Nothing to hide, eh?
.
.
From today’s Fairfax report on the visit of world-renowned investigative journalist, Glenn Greenwald, and Key’s abuse thrown at the man, there were 712 comments posted, before Fairfax closed posting.
A few of the comments were by John Key’s fanboys, like this muppet;
.
.
Who noticed something laughable about Mark000007‘s post?
Check out his first two sentences,
“I really wouldn’t care if the government is ‘spying’ on me, I’ve got nothing to hide”
Nothing to hide, eh?
I wonder if that’s why he uses a pseudonym?
.
References
Fairfax media: Key dismisses GCSB spying claims from Greenwald
Previous related blogposts
The Growth of State Power; mass surveillance; and it’s supporters
.
Above image acknowledgment: Francis Owen/Lurch Left Memes
.
.
= fs =
Online Voting – no longer a viable option post-2013
.
.
There has been public debate recently on the prospect of employing online voting for local body and general elections. The suggestion is made to counter falling voting numbers, as the 2011 general election recorded the lowest voter turn-out (74.21%) since 1887.
But a recent ‘tweet’ by civil liberties advocate; professional techer; and co-founder of the blog, Tech Liberty, made this pertinent point about the wisdom of online voting;
.
.
Thomas Beagle has raised an important point.
The safety and inviolability of privacy in our voting system is integral to democracy. If there were to be even a hint or whiff that this privacy had been violated – the damage it would cause our fragile democratic system might not be repairable for generations.
We have already had assault after assault on our freedoms and privacy – especially since 2008. A few examples in a Roll of Dishonour include;
- Ministerial mis-use of citizen’s private data for political purposes
- And again, by the same Minister
- Illegal spying by the Government Communications Security Bureau
- A Prime Minister who readily admits to regular contact with a sleazy, far-right blogger
- Said sleazy right-wing blogger has no hesitation in using private information to denigrate individuals
- Said sleazy right-wing blogger has close contact with other National ministers
- Leaks to right wing bloggers that serve ministerial agendas
- Several pieces of legislation passed, increasing State surveillance powers
For a party that advocates getting the State our of lives, National has been working over-time to snoop, pry, mis-use private information; leak information for political advantage; and to increase the surveillance powers of government agencies.
As Keith Holyoake, a former National Prime Minister said in 1959;
.
‘The National Party believes in a property-owning democracy. … We believe in the maximum degree of personal freedom and the maximum degree of individual choice for our people. We believe in the least interference necessary with individual rights, and the least possible degree of state interference.’
One suspects that the spirit of Holyoake would be in utter despair at what his party has become since he uttered those words.
Since National has been in office, we have had legislation enacted that has vastly increased State surveillance powers in a way few thought possible in our once fiercely privacy-protective society;
On 1 October 2012, a new law came into effect,
“The Search and Surveillance Act, which was passed through Parliament in March, extends production and examination orders to the police and legalises some forms of surveillance.
It will let more government agencies carry out surveillance operations, allows judges to determine whether journalists can protect their sources, and changes the right to silence.”
Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill
On 21 August 2013,
“… John Key introduced the Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill, which would extend the powers of the GCSB to enable it to collect information from all New Zealanders for the use of other government departments including the New Zealand Police, Defence Force and the Security Intelligence Service.Under the bill, the GCSB will have three main functions. Firstly, it will continue to collect foreign intelligence but it will not be allowed to spy on New Zealanders. Secondly, it will give the GCSB a legal mandate to assist the police, Defence Force and the Security Intelligence Service. Thirdly, it will extend the GCSB’s cyber-security functions to encompass protecting private-sector cyber systems.“
Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Act 2013
“The technical Telecommunications Interception Capability and Security Bill will compel telecommunication firms to assist intelligence agencies in intercepting and decrypting phone calls, texts and emails. ..
[…]
The bill has two parts – interception and network security. It replaces other legislation and is a partner to the Government Communications Security Bureau bill, passed earlier this year.
It compels telecommunications firms and online service providers to give “surveillance agencies” (the police, Security and Intelligence Service (SIS) and the GCSB) access to their clients’ communications.”
The rise of State power and increasing surveillance is simply unprecedented in our history.
We now have at least four state agencies that can pry into our lives; the Customs, Police, SIS, and GCSB. Add WINZ, the IRD, Immigration, et al to the list, and it becomes apparent that this country has become a Westernised, consumer-driven, version of the former East Germany.
We even have our own Stasi-like para-military that raids villages out in the back-blocks, away from prying eyes of the public and media;
.
Armed par-military police, during the 2007 Urewera raid.
.
In five years we have become a quasi-police state.
In April 2013, the Kitteridge Report revealed that up to eightyeight New Zealanders had been illegally spied on by the GCSB.
A month later, in May 2013, not only was no one held to account and not prosecuted;
“…it could not be established that any GCSB staff had the necessary criminal intent to illegally intercept private communications in this case, and GCSB staff cannot be criminally liable”.
– but a subsequent whitewash determined;
“The Inspector-General formed a view that there have been no breaches, although the law is unclear and the Inspector-General recommends amending it,” GCSB Director Ian Fletcher said in a statement.
Fletcher, Key, and other apologist for the GCSB’s law-breaking werelying. The law was not “unclear”. In fact, it was crystal clear that the Bureau could not spy on NZ citizens and permanent residents;
14 Interceptions not to target domestic communications
-
Neither the Director, nor an employee of the Bureau, nor a person acting on behalf of the Bureau may authorise or take any action for the purpose of intercepting the communications of a person (not being a foreign organisation or a foreign person) who is a New Zealand citizen or a permanent resident.
The Dominion Post’s Tracy Watkins got it right when she wrote;
“The GCSB’s interpretation of the law was so loose it managed to spy on 88 New Zealanders even though the law specifically stated it was not allowed to do so.”
Amidst the increased surveillance by the various State agencies; the illegal mis-use of information; ministerial leaks to sociopathic bloggers like Cameron Slater; and previous illegal spying by the GCSB – the prospect of on-line voting is no longer feasible.
It is simply not safe to entrust the sanctity of the privacy of voting to an internet that is now more like an open postcard to the Police, SIS, GCSB, and god-knows-who-else.
We would have absolutely no way of knowing who was accessing our voting.
And if a State agency was caught illegally accessing New Zealanders’ voting records?
The Prime Minister would simply dismiss any such illegality with this kind of sophistry;
“In addition, the Act governing the [online voting process] is not fit for purpose and probably never has been.
It was not until this review was undertaken that the extent of this inadequacy was known.”
So why should we trust a man who has condoned previous acts of illegal state spying on individuals?
He’s done it before.
.
References
Election Results: Party Votes and Turnout by Electorate
NZ History: Elizabeth Yates
Blog: Tech Liberty
Twitter: Thomas Beagle
Fairfax media: Paula Bennett accused of Muldoon-style bullying
TV3: Bennett accused of breaching privacy again
NZ Herald: GCSB report: 88 cases of possible illegal spying uncovered
Radio NZ: Key confessions over Whale Oil
Whaleoil: Know your Wharfies – Cecil Walker
Metro: Her Majesty
NZ Herald: Probe into email leak welcome, says Collins
Te Ara – Encyclopedia of NZ: National Party – Page 4 – Party principles
Legislation: Search and Surveillance Act 2012
NZ Herald: New police search and surveillance law in force
Parliament: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill
Wikipedia: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill
Legislation: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Act 2013
Fairfax media: Spying bill passes into law
TVNZ News: Spy agency could have illegally spied on dozens of Kiwis
Zdnet: NZ spy agency staff cleared in illegal spying probe
TVNZ News: GCSB cleared of illegal spying, though law ‘unclear’
Legislation: Government Communications Security Bureau Act 2003 – Para 14
Dominion Post: Spy bungles start to entangle PM
Additional
NZ Herald: GCSB spying illegal, but no charges laid
Other blogs
The Standard: Tape of ACC-Pullar meeting raises more questions
The Jackal: Judith Collins defamation fail
Tech Liberty: Submission – Telecommunications (Interception Capability & Security) Bill
.
Above image acknowledgment: Francis Owen/Lurch Left Memes
This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 10 June 2014.
.
.
= fs =
The Growth of State Power; mass surveillance; and it’s supporters…
.
.
Next time there’s a debate on state surveillance on an internet blog or other forum, check out who is supporting more power for governments to spy on us. Have a look at those who parrot the cliche, “nothing to hide, nothing to fear”.
They generally use pseudonyms.
.
.
= fs =
Radio NZ: Politics with Matthew Hooton and Mike Williams
.
– Politics on Nine To Noon –
.
– Monday 5 August 2013 –
.
– Kathryn Ryan, with Matthew Hooton & Mike Williams –
.
Today on Politics on Nine To Noon,
.
.
Click to Listen: Politics with Matthew Hooton and Mike Williams (27′ 40″ )
- Discuss the current Fonterra food safety scare;
- the continuing scandal surrounding the GCSB emails;
- Labour’s affordable housing policy,
- and recent positive poll results.
Acknowledgement: Radio NZ
.
.
= fs =
Parliamentary spies and games – some bad numbers
.
The latest revelations add more murkiness to this scandal. It seems that my question here – How deep is Key in this mess? – is slowly being answered. (Expect a snap election when the full extent of Key’s involvement is finally revealed.)
The revelations of shady dealings and privacy violations just keep getting worse;
.
Source: Fairfax Media – Emails given to inquiry
.
Interestingly, a Fairfax poll associated with the above story (note: not scientific) contradicts a recent Roy Morgan poll, showing Dear Leader in a somewhat bad light,
.
Source: IBID
.
But what really boggles the mind and makes you want to scream to the heavens is that Peter Dunne – whose email and telephone records were illegally passed on to the Henry Inquiry, by Parliamentary Services, and has had his privacy violated – is still intending to vote for the Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill and Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Amendment Bill – which will allow the GCSB, SIS, et al to spy on all New Zealanders.
Peter Dunne is not learning a single damn thing from his current situation.
Which makes Dunne’s outrage on this derisable,
“While I understand this was an inadvertent action, and that the file was returned within a very short period of time to Parliamentary Services, this is a serious breach of privacy.
No approval had been given or even sought for access to this material .
The material was released to the inquiry on 21 May – the day before Mr Henry asked for access to my emails, which I refused.
While I am further given to understand that the file was unable to be opened by the inquiry and have been assured therefore that none of the emails were actually read by the inquiry, I am nonetheless extremely concerned and angry about this gross, unauthorised breach of personal privacy, especially since it was my refusal to authorise access to the content of those emails that brought about my resignation as a minister,”
Source: IBID
Cry to someone who cares, Mr Dunne.
To be blunt; why the hell should I be concerned about the invasion of Peter Dunne’s privacy, when he is obviously not in the least concerned about ours?!
As far as I’m concerned, Karma has visited upon Peter Dunne’s head.
The sooner Ohariu voters throw this clown out of Parliament, the better for the whole country.
.
.
= fs =
Radio NZ: Focus on Politics for 2 August 2013
.
– Focus on Politics –
.
– Friday 2 August 2013 –
.
– Brent Edwards –
.
A weekly analysis of significant political issues.
Friday after 6:30pm and Saturday at 5:10pm
The Prime Minister remained defiant this week despite evidence emerging his office had pressured the Parliamentary Service to release phone records to the inquiry into the leak of the Kitteridge report on the GCSB.
.
.
Click to listen: Focus on Politics for 2 August 2013 ( 17′ 38″ )
.
.
.
= fs =
Those who love Big Brother
The majority of sensible, clear-headed New Zealanders are clearly opposed to any further extension of the power of the State to spy over all of us;
.
.
But there are a few, as evidenced by a handful of comments on various fora, who seem to be “relaxed” with the growth of the Surveillance State. They seem to be unconcerned that state apparatus can violate our privacy at will, without just cause, and with minimal checks and balances.
People like these on a post-article Comments section, in a piece written by Rob Kidd and Francesca Lee for the Dominion Post;
.
Source: Dominion Post – Thousands join rally against GCSB
.
“If you aint got anything to hide why should you worry???” – says “Niggly”.
Which is an interesting statement to make since all five supporters of the GCSB Bill (including “Niggly”) are using pseudonyms.
What have they got to hide, I wonder?
It seems fairly clear that supporters of the GCSB Bill are not so keen to abandon their privacy after all. Or, perhaps, being National Party supporters, they believe that Dear Leader Key will be Prime Minister forever, and “their man” would never spy on his loyal supporters.
The word deluded springs to mind.
This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 30 July 2013.
.
.
= fs =
Babes and boofheads…
It seems that the sexualisation and exploitation of our daughters continues unabated,
.
Acknowledgement: Radio NZ – Facebook ‘Babe’ page taken down
.
A bunch of anonymous kids say “they don’t see much wrong” with taking images of girls from various Facebook pages, and reposting it on a sleazy ‘Babe of the Day’ page.
‘‘I and the other two admins of the page are aware that the page may look a bit creepy but as all three of us are high school students and under 18 ourselves, we don’t think we are doing too much harm.”‘
Acknowledgement: ODT – Concern at pupils ‘babe’ web page
These kids did not ask for permission to use the girls’ pics – there is no consent implied or given. And the kids responsible for the page seem utterly oblivious to a practice which objectifies these girls.
If I were a father with a daughter, and her pic had been lifted and exploited in this way, I would take a dim view of a bunch of adolescent boofheads portraying my daughter(s) as objects for someone elses’ gratification.
Our society is sex mad already enough already, without Gen X (or Y or whatever) adding their bit to it.
And the irony of this entire sleazy affair?
One of the administrators of the site, who wished to remain anonymous, defended the page when contacted yesterday.
Acknowledgement: IBID
“The administrators of the site, who wished to remain anonymous…”
So they value their anonymity, do they?
I wonder why? If their little past-time is as inoffensive as they believe, why don’t they come forward?
And put their own pics up for people to gawk at?
It appears they value their own privacy.
.
.
= fs =
It is 1984. It is ALWAYS 1984…
.
.
First, the Labour government introduced the Terrorism Suppression Act 2002. This law could outlaw an organisation and declare them a “terrorist groups”.
.
.
Some see Greenpeace as a terrorist organisation.
Ten years later, and National enacted the Search and Surveillance Act 2012. This law allowed the Police to search or keep citizens under surveillance, without a warrant. The Police simply had to show it was an “emergency”.
.
.
This law allows Police to keep someone under surveillance and search their home if they are a political dissident/protestor.
Or maybe I’m being overly dramatic?
After all, Police wouldn’t be interested in people exercising their democratic right to protest.
Right?
.
.
Eventually, though, the gradual demise of our privacy impacts on all of us. Even for those within the Establishment, who originally thought it was a good idea.
After all, if you’ve done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear.
Right?
.
.
As mainstream media focus and reports endless stories about crime and violence, society becomes more frightened of bogeymen just around the corner; or lurking behind bushes; or following us.
So we welcome any and all laws that successive governments give to the Police because, like children, we’re afraid of the bogeymen that the media tells us is waiting… just around the corner, or behind bushes.
Yes, crime does exist. Meteorites falling out of the sky also exist. Lotto winners exist.
So what are your chances of experiencing all three?
The way the media constantly fixates on crime – you’d think it could happen to you tomorrow.
The government could pass new laws every day of the week. Crime, however, will not go away. You probably will not be a victim tomorrow. Society will not be any more or less be any safer.
After all these laws – is it any more or less safer now?
Is the bogeyman real? Yes, he probably is.
But not today. And not tomorrow. Perhaps, for you, not ever.
But your loss of privacy is with you always.
.
.
.
= fs =
National Party president complains of covert filming – oh the rich irony!
.
.
Oh dear, oh dear me. Karma is working overtime this year – and has National politicians and Party apparatchiks firmly in it’s sights.
National Party president Peter Goodfellow complains of having been the victim of “covert video surveillance”?!?!
But wait – isn’t this precisely what National intended last year when they passed the odious Search and Surveillance Act 2012?!
The NZ Herald – no “lefty” newspaper – condemned the Bill on 21 September 2011, when it was still in passing through Parliament,
“The new search and surveillance bill, which has been on Parliament’s books for two years, acknowledges this by providing for secret filming on private property in serious cases, including arms offences.
But the Government has been in no hurry to pass it, a fact criticised in the Supreme Court judgment. Now, with only two sitting weeks before the general election, time has run out.
If the Government wishes to rush its urgent short-term law through Parliament next week, it needs the Labour Party to agree. However, its leader, Phil Goff, points to the perils inherent in legislation that would apply retrospectively, so filmed evidence already collected could be used. He wants this new bill to go to a select committee. That is the right course.
In that forum, the Government’s case for urgency would be put under appropriate scrutiny. This would surely conclude that, in the context of sound parliamentary practice and the Supreme Court ruling, this legislation is inappropriate and probably unnecessary.”
As Green MP, David Clendon said on 22 March last year,
“This bill is overwhelmingly negative, in that it clearly seeks to give the widest possible powers to the police, to the Customs Service, to the Department of Internal Affairs, to the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, and to a whole swathe of other Government officials who hereafter will be enabled to make the most extraordinary intrusions into the private business of New Zealand citizens, who may well simply be going about their legal and honest business.
There is simply no justification for such a wide-ranging, all-encompassing, enabling approach. We simply do not have the political climate or the legal or social context that requires the level of intrusion that this bill will allow. This is far beyond the reasonable needs of the police or any other Government enforcement agency.
The argument that this level of intrusion need concern only criminals, and that honest people may rest assured that their privacy and the integrity of their homes, business, and indeed their person will not be compromised, simply does not wash.”
The National Business Review wasn’t terrible happy either, in this headlined story a day later,
‘Undemocratic’ Search and Surveillance Bill made law
And Taranaki’s Daily News” editorial on 2 October last year was equally critical,
“At the time of the act’s introduction to Parliament in March, Justice Minister Judith Collins defended it on the basis of it bringing “order, certainty, clarity and consistency to messy, unclear and outdated search and surveillance laws”.
She also pointed out that the act draws together, under one statute, the powers that existed under 69 separate laws.
That rationale, which borders on the closest the Government could come up with as an assurance that this was no significant change, more good housekeeping, will reassure no-one.
[…]
Even at this early stage there is a disquiet among many in this country who traditionally are government supporters.”
The Search and Surveillance Act 2012 gave extensive additional powers to the Police and to other State bodies. In many instances, Police may not even have to apply for a warrant to keep you, your family, your friends, under surveillance.
So for Mr Goodfellow to now complain about a breach of his privacy because he was covertly filmed… oh the delicious irony of it!
A private investigator may not be an official arm of the State – but considering that National is only too happy to contract out services – including private prisons and schools – should not escape our notice. A private investigator is only a contract-away from doing the State’s bidding.
Especially under a National regime.
And anyway, what does Mr Goodfellow have to fear if he is being covertly filmed?
As National MP Tim Macindoe said in Parliament on 7 March last year, when the Search and Surveillance Bill was being debated,
“I have to say I do not have a lot of interest in the human rights of those who are not interested in obeying the laws, because quite often they threaten our safety, our security, our homes, our elderly, and the vulnerable in our society.”
Ain’t it a bitch when a government passes authoritarian legislation, extending police powers, and that government’s own Party members get caught up as ‘victims’ of a resulting culture of State intrusion into our private lives?
Welcome to the real world, Mr Goodfellow.
.
.
.
= fs =
News Archives
Crony Watch
Keeping an eye on dodgy government appointees, crony-by-crony!
Frankly Speaking... 