Achi news desk-
Australians are not allowed to know how many times – if at all – local intelligence agencies have tapped overseas phones under a new bilateral agreement with the US. At least, not yet.
On January 31 this year, the United States and Australia entered into force an agreement to allow each other’s intelligence agencies to obtain electronic and telephone data from service providers in the other country. The deal was originally struck between US Attorney General Merrick Garland and then Home Affairs Minister Karen Andrews in 2021.
Cricket asked a number of Australian agencies for information on how many times the so-called international production orders (IPO) have been sought and secured so far, but the requests have been refused.
The Australian Signals Directorate and the Australian Federal Police forwarded the requests to the Attorney-General’s Department (AGD), which responded through a spokesperson who declined to answer the question but said agencies are legally required to report this information to the attorney-general within three months of the end of each financial year.
The Australian Secret Intelligence Service responded with its own disclaimer: “Consistent with longstanding practice, the Australian Secret Intelligence Service does not comment on intelligence matters.”
When Garland and Attorney General Mark Dreyfus announced the agreement coming into force, they said in a joint statement that the agreement would “transform and improve international cooperation in tackling serious crime, including terrorism and child sexual abuse”.
“The agreement will allow US and Australian authorities to have more timely access to electronic data held by service providers in the partner country,” the statement continued. “Having this information will help US and Australian agencies prevent, detect, investigate and prosecute serious crimes and protect our national security.”
A report by the Commonwealth Ombudsman to the watchdog of covert electronic surveillance, published last week, found that agencies involved in the IPO scheme showed “varying levels of willingness to use an order”.
“Very little training was provided to staff, including for applicants and authorization officers [and] “solutions for handling information obtained from an order were not tested and finalized,” the report noted.
Under the IPO plan, relevant agencies can request the interception of live communications, access to stored communications, and telecommunications data from the other country. “For example, this could include files uploaded to a storage/backup service, emails and chat history, as well as information relating to those communications such as the time sent, associated geolocation data, IP addresses or the identity of the people who send the messages ,” said the AGD in an explainer.
