13/05/2016
With regards to the SSA Amendment Bill 2016, lets clarify something:
1) The SSA Amendment Bill expands the services of the SSA from just intelligence gathering on Drug Trafficking and other Drug Related Offenses to other major serious crimes.
2) This Bill amends the current Strategic Services Act of 1995.
However, under the Strategic Services Act of 1995, I quote the following:
1) The Strategic Services Agency is hereby established,
consisting of the Director and employees of the Agency.
2) The functions of the Agency shall be exercised by the
Director after consultation with the Minister.
This clearly show that the SSA Director is answerable to the Executive Branch of our Government. What is to prevent this administration from abusing this power if the need arises.
Already we had two instances in the past when the functions of these agencies were compromised: Manning using SAUTT for spying (illegal wiretapping) on Judges, Journalists and Opposition members and the People Partnership imposing an unqualified person (Reshmi Ramnarine) as head of the SSA.
Now, some are already arguing that there are enough checks and balances in place under the Interception of Communications Act of 2010 to deal with this problem. However, let me quote something from this act:
1) This Bill seeks to provide the legal framework within which public or private communications, which are being transmitted by means of a public or private telecommunications network, can be lawfully intercepted. An interception of communication is lawfully done only when it is done pursuant to a warrant issued by a Judge on an application by an AUTHORISED OFFICER. Consequently, it is an offence for a person intentionally to intercept a communication being transmitted without an order of the Court.
2) In this Act – “authorized officer” means an officer or a person AUTHORISED by the MINISTER;
Thus, once again, the checks and balances relies on the Executive Branch of the Government along with some assistance of the Judiciary.
Ask yourself if you feel safe enough with this limited checks and balance especially given that this power has been abused on more than one occasion in the recent past.
Why would it be so difficult to have this agency not report to an Independent Commission or Committee that could more or less deal with them in a more neutral manner.
However, this is just my limited opinion on this matter and clearly people should read the three Documents properly to form a purely unbaised opinion.
Just my ranting and raving today as a concerned citizen on a very controversial issue. This is in no way intended to influence anyone on this subject matter as I am no expert.
