National Measurement Institute one of 61 agencies seeking to be classed as a ‘criminal law-enforcement agency’ in order to gain access to phone and web data

This article is more than 4 years old

This article is more than 4 years old

If you are in the business of selling lamb chops, make sure you are weighing them properly: the National Measurement Institute wants warrantless access to Australians’ metadata to help them hunt down supermarkets skimping on portions.

Dozens of agencies want warrantless access to Australians' metadata again Read more

The NMI is one of 61 agencies that has applied to the attorney general, George Brandis, to be classed as a “criminal law-enforcement agency” in order to gain warrantless access to telecommunications data.

The government’s mandatory data retention laws, introduced last year, increased the already vast array of personal phone and internet data of Australians that would be accessible to government agencies, and all without a warrant.

Agencies can seek access by filling out a short form and sending it directly to a phone or internet company.

As part of the government’s assurances that there would be sufficient privacy safeguards, it reduced the number of agencies that could access the data.

But agencies could reapply, with the permission of the attorney general, if they were involved in enforcing “serious contraventions” of criminal laws.

Following requests from ZDnet and Geordie Guy on Right to Know, a list of 61 agencies which have sought to be declared criminal law enforcement agencies has been published. Among them is the National Measurement Institute.

A spokeswoman for the NMI, Yen Heng, referred questions about its application to the attorney general’s department.

The agency’s enforcement activities relate to measuring and packaged goods. It has carried out four successful prosecutions according to its compliance report:

Lakemba Jewellery: found guilty for using an unverified measuring instrument. It was fined $5,000.

Coles Supermarkets Australia: Pleaded guilty for using “a weighing instrument not at zero while uploaded and shortfalls of up to 9.4% in prepacked lamb chops”. Fined $3,000.

Santoshi International Pty Ltd: Pleaded guilty to “shortfalls of up to 50% in prepacked spices”. Fined $3,000.

Woolworths Ltd: Pleaded guilty “to shortfalls of up to 41% in prepacked birthday cakes”. Fined $3,300.

Brandis said was the purpose of the new data retention laws was to pursue “serious criminal investigations”.



Greens senator Scott Ludlam said: “The only saving grace the government was able to claim when they passed it was that they were narrowing the range of agencies that could access the data.

“On the face of it that was true, and obviously that’s just been blown to pieces.”

Other agencies that seek to prosecute crimes at the lower end of the scale have also sought to reapply, including Bankstown council in south-western Sydney.

A spokesman for the council said it had gained successful prosecutions into illegal dumping as a result of telecommunications access.

“We only ever had access to call records which assisted us in placing a person at the scene of an illegal dumping offence after they initially denied involvement. One involved the dumping of around 20,000 tonnes of waste at five different sites,” he said.



“As a result, this information has resulted in a number of successful prosecutions relating to illegal dumping.”

RSPCA Victoria is also seeking access from the attorney general. A spokeswoman told Guardian Australia that before the changes to the law telecommunications data had been “a critical tool used in animal cruelty investigations” by its inspectorate, which was the only part of the organisation that accessed the data.

Dallas Buyers Club piracy case: judge dismisses bid to access private details Read more

“Due to the importance of telecommunications data in the Inspectorate’s criminal investigations, RSPCA Victoria made a submission to the attorney general’s department seeking to regain access to telecommunications data.”

There is some confusion about the precise nature of the applications made by the 61 agencies on the list and their status. It appears that some of the agencies, including Australia Post, may have been declined access.

A spokesman said the organisation requested to be a criminal law enforcement agency “to directly request access to telecommunications data to assist investigations into the use of mobile phones stolen from our network or retail outlets”.

But “Australia Post did not receive access rights in this instance and has no current plans to reapply.”

A spokesman for the attorney general’s department did not directly answer Guardian Australia’s questions, instead responding with a statement: “The government’s data retention legislation reduced access to telecommunications data under the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 from those agencies performing enforcement and related functions down to 21 specified core criminal law enforcement and security agencies.”

He listed the 21 agencies specified in the act.

“The attorney general has not temporarily declared any additional enforcement agencies,” he said.

