Law enforcement wishlists
From Drcampaign
The plans for mandatory data retention date back to 2000. Since then, many different police wishlists have been distributed widely. To get a better idea of the extent of data that might some time soon be stored about your communication behaviour and travel patterns (assuming you have a mobile communication device), please take a look at the following documents.
- Proposal Lithuania to JHA Council about the kinds of data (15.04.2005) (http://register.consilium.eu.int/pdf/en/05/st08/st08004.en05.pdf)
Draft Framework Decision on the retention of data processed and stored in connection with the provision of publicly available electronic communications services or data on public communications networks for the purpose of prevention, investigation, detection and prosecution of crime and criminal offences including terrorism.
- Non Paper law enforcement (September 2004, public since April 2005) (http://www.bof.nl/docs/non-paper.pdf)
Data retention wishlist of several EU police services, created during a workshop hosted in the Netherlands in September 2004
- Draft Framework Decision on the retention of data (April 2004) (http://register.consilium.eu.int/pdf/en/04/st08/st08958.en04.pdf)
Original proposal from France, Sweden, UK and Ireland for a framework decision on data retention
- Principles on the Availability of Data Essential to Protecting Public Safety (May 2002) (http://canada.justice.gc.ca/en/news/g8/doc3.html)
G8 Statement about data retention
- Expert meeting on cyber crime: Data retention (April 2002) (http://www.gilc.org/europol.pdf)
Europol wishlist data retention
- Overview of vital traffic data necessary for investigations (November 2001) (http://www.bof.nl/docs/Comments_on_Data_Retention.pdf)
Expert Statement, European Working Party on Information Technology Crime, Interpol
Annex 1 (http://www.bof.nl/docs/Annex_1_of_Data_Retention_comments.pdf)
Annex 2 (http://www.bof.nl/docs/Annex_2_of_Data_Retention_comments.pdf)
- Potential Consequences for Data Retention of Various Business Models Characterizing Internet Service Providers (May 2001) (http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/i_crime/high_tec/conf0105-4.html)
Report about G8 workshop on data retention
- NCIS submission on communications data retention law (August 2000) (http://cryptome.org/ncis-carnivore.htm)
Raport by the UK national criminal intelligence service, on behalf of UK Association of Chief Police Officers, H.M. Customs & Excise, the security service, the secret intelligence service and the GCHQ. Highlights:
- Predates the September 11 terrorist attacks in the US by a year
- Includes as part of the conclusion "CONCLUSION: 7.1.1 There is a convergence of issues. Communications data is of crucial importance to Law Enforcement, and the Intelligence and Security Agencies but our needs are in conflict with existing legislation arising from data protection provisions and ECHR." (Emphasis added)
- talks about a seven year retention period, of which the first should be "online" (directly accessible)
- Mentions a confidential appendix of case studies that are said to show that communications data already is a great help in criminal investigations.
- Mentions a "study of costs" undertaken to benchmark the costs for "csp`s", claims this study represents 45% of the UK telecommunications market.
- Envisions an optional centralized storage, mentions that law enforcement agencies should centrally store all requested communications data regardless of where it comes from. (even if it turns out to be a dead end in an investigation)
- Mentions the fact that independent experts could vouch for the integrity of the data from the central storage when used in a trial. In this it is one of the few documents that talks about ensuring the integrity of this data on its way to the presentation in court. (It doesn`t mention how should be ensured that only accurate data gets recorded in the first place)
