- GT&T, union voice concern
New wire tapping laws proposed by the government have sparked fears about their application, prompting calls for wider consultation and a serious review.
The major stakeholder, the Guyana Telephone and Telegraph Company (GT&T) has already registered its concerns about the tabled legislation, while the union representing workers in the telecommunications industry has said it has dire consequences for its members.
Gillian Burton
The bills, the Interception of Communications Bill 2008 and the Telecommunications Amendment Bill 2008, were formulated in response to the widespread use of mobile phones in the planning and commission of recent major crimes. The bills are intended to aid the tracking and identifying of persons in possession of the cellular devices during police investigations. But they include major provisions that will likely raise civil liberties concerns.
GT&T Chief Financial Officer Yog Mahadeo told Stabroek News yesterday that the company has registered all its concerns with Head of the Presidential Secretariat Dr Roger Luncheon. “So our concerns are known because we would have known of the proposals in the beginning, but we are just an entity and we will have to follow regulations or any rules that are put into effect,” Mahadeo said.
He was not, however, at liberty to discuss the company’s concerns.
At a press conference yesterday at its East Street headquarters, the Postal and Telecommunications Workers Union (PTWU) listed serious reservations about some sections of the bill. President of the union Gillian Barton told reporters that the proposed amendments tell the union that some of their members who go out to work to carry out directives will be put in a precarious position, making them obliged to comply with a judge’s ruling or face imprisonment or large fines. She said the union sees it as an infringement on the rights of workers as it would see some workers going on the breadline for fear of their lives. “We are not against interception, but we feel that it should be done by some separate agency and not the telecommunications industry, because we know what can happen if persons become suspicions that an employee or particular department of employees has that responsibility. It puts them in a precarious position and could even be detrimental,” she explained.
She said the union’s executive is also concerned that if for any reason some workers refuse to comply they could be taken before the court and be made to pay a large fine or be subject to imprisonment.
Further Barton said she was surprised that the union was not consulted. It only became aware of the details and implications of the pieces of legislation when a member of the parliamentary opposition gave it copies. She said an executive meeting was called and a review done, exposing the implications for the union’s membership. “We are saying put it on hold until proper public consultation. Our footwork has shown that many people are not aware of what these legislations will do. So consult instead of letting it creep up on us,” she added.
She also insisted that there needed to be the setting up of an agency to specially deal with what the legislations propose.
The union intends to continue sensitizing its members about the implications of the laws and to push for its proposal for a review to be upheld.
The bills were first tabled in the National Assembly on August 7, 2008 and will be debated following the annual parliamentary recess which comes to an end on October 10.
The Interception of Communications Bill 2008 proposes to intercept telecommunications and covers monitoring of transmissions made by fibre optic cable or any other form of wire line, by wireless telegraphy, voice over internet protocol, internet and all other forms of electromagnetic communication to or from the apparatus comprising the systems. An interception will only be allowed after permission is granted to an authorized officer by a judge. (The officer will have to submit his/her application with an affidavit deposing the facts or allegations necessitating the application.) Upon a directive by the national security minister, the bill would also permit the disclosure of the intercept to a foreign government or agency of such government where there exists an agreement for the mutual exchange of information. The unauthorized disclosure of intercepted information can lead to a fine not exceeding $5 million and imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years.
The Telecommunications Amendment Bill 2008 would require providers of SIM-cards and cellular phones to establish at their own cost a system of recording and storing particulars of SIM-cards and mobile cellular phones and the customers utilizing them. A customer who sells or otherwise transfers a mobile cellular phone or SIM-card to any person other than a family member residing with him/her must convey this information to the service provider. In the case of theft or loss of a SIM-Card or cell phone the matter should be reported to the police and the service provider.
From the date of the commencement of the law, there will be a 12-month period for the service provider to log and store the required information. Clause 2 (d) of the bill says the information that would have to be recorded by the service provider includes details of transactions of persons calling and persons receiving calls and the time and duration of calls.
I dont what whats really wrong with this government!! Lets wire tap the Office of the President and State house along with some Ministries and see how they like it. Like old say “dem too fass”.
Dorian. Can you tell us how your crime was solved in the UK?.
Dorian::::Why stop there? Lets wiretap those in the PNCR too…Sounds fair to me….dont you think?
The Communications Bill 2008 which appears to have been formulated in response to the widespread use of mobile phones in the planning and commission of recent major crimes is one of the most important pieces of legislation being processed by the government.
This is not a matter needing input from the Postal and Telecommunications Workers Union. This is a matter of urgent national security; however Gillian Barton may have a point in commenting that forces technicians dressed as telephone workers may be need to install any listening devices.
In a perfect world, such recordings would not be necessary but crime in Guyana (including drugs related crime) must be curbed urgently and criminals are frightened about what their telephone logs reveal.
It is for this reason forces wireless communication equipment is stolen time and again in order to bypass the telephone networks.
The government should fast-track this bill.
What ’s all the big fuss about. Govt. in developed countries does this all the time to solve crimes and terrorist activities. I guess the Massay guy alleged crime in the UK was not solved by this method.
Give me a break Satish. You are a sympathiser who cannot and will not accept that your government is engaging in TOTALITARIAN acts and is hell bent on riding rough shod on CIVIL LIBERTIES. This will give them CARTE BLANCHE FREEDOM to interfere with everybody’s business. Read George Orwell’s novel which deals with this issue.
Wiretapping can & will only work in a society that has a legitimate judicial system & an independent agency needs to take the responsibility. There should be no government interference, which is more than likely what will happen in Guyana. The PPP/C government has proven itself to be way too corrupt for wiretapping people’s phones not to be used for the fulfillment of THEIR objectives & not necessarily maintenance of law & order.
This is law will accelerate and compound the blatant abuse of political power; of course the government will use it’s majority in parliament to establish this ‘law’ . I mean which judge is going to refuse to sign the invasive order that comes out of Robb street? With the high level of discomfort among the populace about the way the ppp is ‘running things’ here, who or what is the oversight committee to ensure that this powerful political tool does not become a greater lever against “freedom of expression.”
Simply put, I do not believe that this instrument will be used solely for the purpose it was written in it’s present state and in the hands of the ppp.
This exercise is not designed to wire tap everyones phone,but those that are suspected in engaging in criminal enterprise.A judge or similar symbol of authority will issue a warrant or directive to monitor transmission.If you or yours are affected then you have a reason to be concerned.
Then it should go for the Government and all political parties.
BET THE GOVT WILL WIRETAPP ANYONE WHO DOES NOT FOLLOW THEIR AGENDA …THIS IS A DICTATORSHIP IN GUYANA POLITICAL CONTROL ETC IS PARAMOUNT TO ANY LIBERTY.
YOU are right my friend start with the present administration first then work your way down, and i am sure you would’nt reach midway in years to come.
Wiretapping is a serious thing which must have restrictions on its use. In developed countries it is only done on an order signed by a judge after a case has been made by relevant authorities requesting for such use.
No one has to physically go where anyone is to do such. It is done within the telecommunications centre.
I am opined that solving crimes and catching criminals is only an afterthought about this ‘Bill’.
I have a few reservations about this bill.
(1).One was already mention by Vatvic that is, no judge in his/her right mind would refuse to sign the order coming out of Robb Street, which would grant permission to invade one’s privacy. If they did then tomorrow they can rest assure that they will be on the bread line or see they careers through the door.
(2). Why is it, if you lost your cell phone you need to report it both to the police as well as the Phone company. This double entry process is a waste of time and resources. Unless, you were robbed or had the phone insured then a police report is necessary in order for you to make a claim with your insurance company. Else, the only report that should be made is with the phone company and they should have a well kept record should the police need it.
(3). Again if you are transferring your number to a friend or someone else what does the police has to do with this? If i transfer my number to a friend then the telephone company records will should the history of that number. should the police need to know who held the number before the phone company should be able to provide them with this information.
(4). Why is it that the employees of the telephone companies are being handed this responsibility. The Joint Services need to create special department fully equip with todays technology and with properly trained staff to coordinate and execute such mandate provided within the Bill.
So putting this all together, i see no reason to burden the GPF with unnecessary “report taking”. Let us be smart here there is no reason for two entities to be taking the same report. Why create redundancies in process? We should have our police officers concentrating on fighting crime thats really where they focus ought to be in this period of uncertainty. Or we should have an Independent Agency setup to conduct and carry out this mandate. I have no Confidence in the PPP nor the PNC to respect the rule of Law and i can only see this law, if pass, being used for partisan means.
This may be a good bill for national security, of course this was expected because all countries are doing this after 911, so people don’t get angry. Only one thing i disagree with is if someone loses or sells their phone they have to report it to the police as lost property, i feel the only person who should have that info is the telephone carrier, and not the police that’s giving them too much liberty in your personal business.
Pepie i totally agree with you that’s too much on the security force, an independent entity needs to be organized to carry out that function.
The funny thing about life in Guyana is that Roger Khan had his wiretapping Bill passed more than six years ago and never sought a judge permission before exercising the contents outline in his Bill. He didn’t need or requested the help of employees of any telephone company, yet he was effective in tapping into the conversations of many. Lets not forget according to Roger Khan he was fighting crime on behalf of the government. Suh dis wiretapping ting sweeten dem now dem gon mek am into law.
I await Uncle Freddie’s interpretation of The Telecommunications Amendment Bill 2008.
ehhh ! what’s up doc ! chomp ,, chomp,, i see y’all speculating here like the guys on wall st,, some ah y’all helping in a large way to destabilise the govt,, of GUYANA ,, is it possible for u to harness ur destructive behavior ,, and exude anything positive ,, if not for ur sake but for those suffering in GY !……
can any of u remember how it was during the times ,, when ,, the lines in the sun ,, was symbolic with king kong !???????????????????
Bgs, I’d like to know your definition of a ’stable government.’ As for those lines in the sun, if u r referring to what I think u r, then I’d take those any day in exchange for being jerked out of my sleep with a machine gun in my face. I tell u, Bgs, you almost make me wanna be Elmr Fdd.