�鶹������ý

The Australian Parliament is rushing through consideration of a so-called compromise approach to its encryption bill, the . This bill would grant significant new powers to the Australian government that would threaten strong encryption, cybersecurity, and fundamental human rights including privacy. The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security (PJCIS) just released a including proposed amendments to the bill. However, even if these recommendations are incorporated into the bill, they would not cure the significant threats posed by the legislation.

Despite the accelerated review process, �鶹������ý’s Open Technology Institute (OTI) submitted of coalition comments criticizing the bill’s sweeping new authorities. In response to an invitation by the PJCIS to provide a supplementary submission, on November 21 we also submitted a . These supplemental comments note that coalition members continue to oppose the bill, but outline amendments that “would ameliorate, though not cure, some of the most significant concerns the bill would raise.” The amendments outlined by the coalition include narrowing the powers granted by the bill to help ensure they do not threaten digital security for everyone, requiring prior judicial approval of government demands, and limiting the bill’s secrecy provisions.

The 17 recommendations of the PJCIS include some helpful proposals such as amending the bill to improve the process through which tech companies may challenge government demands. However, the recommended amendments essentially call for minor changes and are completely insufficient to mitigate the harms the bill would cause if enacted. In addition, if Australia enacts such a bill, this would as well.

The following quote can be attributed to Sharon Bradford Franklin, Director of Surveillance & Cybersecurity Policy, �鶹������ý’s Open Technology Institute:

“The Australian Parliament should not rush to grant unprecedented powers to the Australian government that would run roughshod over the rights of Australians and technology users around the globe. Even if the PJCIS recommendations are incorporated, the Assistance and Access bill will continue to pose grave threats to encryption, digital security, and individual privacy rights. Parliament should resist the calls for an end of year deadline and take the time to reconsider this ill-advised and dangerous bill.”

See the September 9, 2018 coalition comments from 31 civil society organizations, technology companies, and trade associations, that OTI submitted on the original Exposure Draft of the bill .

See the October 11, 2018 coalition comments from 38 civil society organizations, technology companies, and trade associations, that OTI submitted to the PJCIS inquiry .

See the November 21, 2018 supplemental coalition comments from 29 civil society organizations, technology companies, and trade associations, that OTI submitted to the PJCIS inquiry .