All changes made to the description and title of this division.

View division | Edit description

Change Division
senate vote 2018-09-20#4

Edited by mackay

on 2018-09-21 12:03:18

Title

  • Motions - Right to Privacy - Uphold and enshrine in law
  • Motions - Right to Privacy - Protect

Description

  • The majority voted against a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?id=2018-09-20.58.1) introduced by Greens Senator [Jordan Steele-John](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/wa/jordon_steele-john) (WA), which means it failed.
  • ### Motion text
  • > *That the Senate—*
  • > *(a) notes that:*
  • >> *(i) in 2013, the UN General Assembly affirmed that the rights held by people offline must also be protected online, and it called upon all states to respect and protect the right to privacy in digital communication,*
  • >> *(ii) on 13 September 2018, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled that the methods for bulk interception of online communications used by the United Kingdom's (UK) Government Communications Headquarters violated privacy and failed to provide sufficient surveillance safeguards,*
  • >> *(iii) the ECHR ruled that safeguards must indicate "the nature of offences which may give rise to an interception order; a definition of the categories of people liable to have their communications intercepted; a limit on the duration of interception; the procedure to be followed for examining, using and storing the data obtained; the precautions to be taken when communicating the data to other parties; and the circumstances in which intercepted data may or must be erased or destroyed",*
  • >> *(iv) the legal challenge was brought by Big Brother Watch and Others following revelations by National Security Agency whistleblower, Mr Edward Snowden, in 2013 that intelligence services were covertly intercepting, processing, and storing communications data in bulk, and*
  • >> *(v) Australian mass surveillance laws, including the proposed Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment (Assistance and Access) Bill 2018, are based on the UK Investigatory Powers Act 2016, also known as the Snoopers' Charter; and*
  • > *(b) calls on the Federal Government to:*
  • >> *(i) consider Australia's obligations under the UN Declaration of Human Rights and international laws, including the European General Data Protection Regulation, and*
  • >> *(ii) review Australian privacy and surveillance laws, to ensure Australians' human rights are upheld, including their right to privacy, and that sufficient safeguards are enshrined in legislation.*
  • >> *(ii) review Australian privacy and surveillance laws, to ensure Australians' human rights are upheld, including their right to privacy, and that sufficient safeguards are enshrined in legislation.*
senate vote 2018-09-20#4

Edited by mackay

on 2018-09-21 12:03:00

Title

  • Motions Right to Privacy
  • Motions - Right to Privacy - Uphold and enshrine in law

Description

  • <p class="speaker">Jordon Steele-John</p>
  • <p>I move:</p>
  • <p class="italic">That the Senate&#8212;</p>
  • The majority voted against a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?id=2018-09-20.58.1) introduced by Greens Senator [Jordan Steele-John](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/wa/jordon_steele-john) (WA), which means it failed.
  • ### Motion text
  • > *That the Senate—*
  • > *(a) notes that:*
  • >> *(i) in 2013, the UN General Assembly affirmed that the rights held by people offline must also be protected online, and it called upon all states to respect and protect the right to privacy in digital communication,*
  • >> *(ii) on 13 September 2018, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled that the methods for bulk interception of online communications used by the United Kingdom's (UK) Government Communications Headquarters violated privacy and failed to provide sufficient surveillance safeguards,*
  • >> *(iii) the ECHR ruled that safeguards must indicate "the nature of offences which may give rise to an interception order; a definition of the categories of people liable to have their communications intercepted; a limit on the duration of interception; the procedure to be followed for examining, using and storing the data obtained; the precautions to be taken when communicating the data to other parties; and the circumstances in which intercepted data may or must be erased or destroyed",*
  • >> *(iv) the legal challenge was brought by Big Brother Watch and Others following revelations by National Security Agency whistleblower, Mr Edward Snowden, in 2013 that intelligence services were covertly intercepting, processing, and storing communications data in bulk, and*
  • >> *(v) Australian mass surveillance laws, including the proposed Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment (Assistance and Access) Bill 2018, are based on the UK Investigatory Powers Act 2016, also known as the Snoopers' Charter; and*
  • > *(b) calls on the Federal Government to:*
  • >> *(i) consider Australia's obligations under the UN Declaration of Human Rights and international laws, including the European General Data Protection Regulation, and*
  • >> *(ii) review Australian privacy and surveillance laws, to ensure Australians' human rights are upheld, including their right to privacy, and that sufficient safeguards are enshrined in legislation.*
  • <p class="italic">(a) notes that:</p>
  • <p class="italic">&#160;&#160;(i) in 2013, the UN General Assembly affirmed that the rights held by people offline must also be protected online, and it called upon all states to respect and protect the right to privacy in digital communication,</p>
  • <p class="italic">&#160;&#160;(ii) on 13 September 2018, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled that the methods for bulk interception of online communications used by the United Kingdom's (UK) Government Communications Headquarters violated privacy and failed to provide sufficient surveillance safeguards,</p>
  • <p class="italic">&#160;&#160;(iii) the ECHR ruled that safeguards must indicate "the nature of offences which may give rise to an interception order; a definition of the categories of people liable to have their communications intercepted; a limit on the duration of interception; the procedure to be followed for examining, using and storing the data obtained; the precautions to be taken when communicating the data to other parties; and the circumstances in which intercepted data may or must be erased or destroyed",</p>
  • <p class="italic">&#160;&#160;(iv) the legal challenge was brought by Big Brother Watch and Others following revelations by National Security Agency whistleblower, Mr Edward Snowden, in 2013 that intelligence services were covertly intercepting, processing, and storing communications data in bulk, and</p>
  • <p class="italic">&#160;&#160;(v) Australian mass surveillance laws, including the proposed Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment (Assistance and Access) Bill 2018, are based on the UK <i>Investigatory Powers Act 2016</i>, also known as the Snoopers' Charter; and</p>
  • <p class="italic">(b) calls on the Federal Government to:</p>
  • <p class="italic">&#160;&#160;(i) consider Australia's obligations under the UN Declaration of Human Rights and international laws, including the European General Data Protection Regulation, and</p>
  • <p class="italic">&#160;&#160;(ii) review Australian privacy and surveillance laws, to ensure Australians' human rights are upheld, including their right to privacy, and that sufficient safeguards are enshrined in legislation.</p>
  • <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p>
  • <p>The question is that motion No. 1096 be agreed to.</p>