I love Australia but their government is shit
Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone
41–50 of 363 posts
Re: Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh jog on, While I'm hardly impressed with this action from NSW State government, it does not represent Australia as an entirety. Further, while unusual and new, these are bail conditions. I challenge you to find a US state that does not engage in bail conditions similarly draconian. This is like seeing NYC or Cali Gun restrictions and saying the US isn't a liberal democracy because of them.
The conditions of his arrest sound ridiculous in the first place. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jun/24/i-neve... https://www.queenslandjudgments.com.au/caselaw/qdc/2020/331 He was charged for "interfering with a railway" because of a tripod suspended over a rail line? It sounds like he was basically pissed off some powerful coal people, got thrown in jail for that, and now his phone is police propert…
This is all the long tail of the corrupt-as-hell Scott Morrison government which was just evicted pretty soundly (after too bloody long though, and somehow Dutton is still in). NSW in particular once ICAC took a look had Gladys Berejiklian suddenly resign (as all these state level criminals do the second they get called before it), and the notable events surrounding why the Australian Federal Police Fixated Persons Unit arrested the producer of FriendlyJordies (political YouTuber) who was being sued by her Deputy Premier John Barilaro for defamation, who also is being investigated for corruption right now when a job was invented and given to him when he decided to exit politics (on account of "definitely going down for corruption as well").
Which is a long way to say that if the current Labor government has any sense, Federal ICAC will be done, and strong, soon (they say October) because switching the lights on in Parliament House is going to send a lot of cockroaches scurrying. Just need to make sure we get them with the boot.
Re: Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone
#43After a discussion with a lawyer friend (not australia, canada, so tangentially related), the "presumption of innocence" that would not obligate this person to have or produce a key for whatever gibberish someone sends to their devices, is what's known in legal circles as a "principle of fundamental justice," and it is not a right that is either absolute or inaliable the way that american rights are set up. One doesn…
Given the cynical application of laws and their moderating charter exceptions in places like Australia and Canada over the last few years,
Examples? You can’t just make extraordinary claims without extraordinary evidence.
Re: Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone
#44After a discussion with a lawyer friend (not australia, canada, so tangentially related), the "presumption of innocence" that would not obligate this person to have or produce a key for whatever gibberish someone sends to their devices, is what's known in legal circles as a "principle of fundamental justice," and it is not a right that is either absolute or inaliable the way that american rights are set up. One doesn…
Given the cynical application of laws and their moderating charter exceptions in places like Australia and Canada over the last few years, Examples? You can’t just make extraordinary claims without extraordinary evidence.
Here's one: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32299244
Re: Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone
#45After a discussion with a lawyer friend (not australia, canada, so tangentially related), the "presumption of innocence" that would not obligate this person to have or produce a key for whatever gibberish someone sends to their devices, is what's known in legal circles as a "principle of fundamental justice," and it is not a right that is either absolute or inaliable the way that american rights are set up. One doesn…
> it's pretty clear [NZ has] a "so sue me," approach to legislation and governance NEw Zealander here: I honestly don’t understand what you are talking about. The culture of “sue”ing doesn’t really exist here. I wouldn’t guess there was a lot in common between NZ and Ozzie: we laugh or cry about what happens over in Oz. No idea about Canada.
As I understand it: No one in law or government has any attachment to the idea of freedom so they view restrictions on it as costless solutions to their problems. Thus “Well, if you don’t like it, sue us.” Us being the government.
Re: Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone
#46Pretty serious overstep of rights - hopefully these kinds of restrictions don't pass muster when they get challenged. It's ridiculous we can impose this on someone who hasn't even been found guilty.
I wouldn't take this as representative of Australia as a whole though - In many other respects we have excellent institutions and strong rights.
Re: Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone
#47I love Australia but their government is shit
It's the NSW government that passed the shitty authoritarian laws that caused this. Any guess which party runs that state?
Re: Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone
#48When I first started reading this I thought it was a fictional dystopian story to warn about the future. But this is now?!
Re: Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
By what metric are your rights inalienable and innate? Your government permits you to to have those rights through extremely similar mechanisms to ours in Australia. Has the US ever violated one of its citizens 'innate rights'? Constantly, there are thousands of professional constitutional lawyers and government officials arguing over the interpretation of that document and the precedents set by historic interpretati…
>By what metric are your rights inalienable and innate? The 2nd. Edit: >definitively your government giving you the rights Because we've gotten lazy and allowed it. Most of our legislative buildings have public balconies above the floors where laws are made. The architecture is sort of a reminder/implicit threat. Or it was, once upon a time. "We're watching you. Don't make any laws that are draconian".
i dont know man, as a non-american, why do you consider your constitution with so much regard as being bulletproof? cant your government just change it? like any other governments do? whats so sacrosanct about it?
Re: Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone
#50After a discussion with a lawyer friend (not australia, canada, so tangentially related), the "presumption of innocence" that would not obligate this person to have or produce a key for whatever gibberish someone sends to their devices, is what's known in legal circles as a "principle of fundamental justice," and it is not a right that is either absolute or inaliable the way that american rights are set up. One doesn…
> it's pretty clear [NZ has] a "so sue me," approach to legislation and governance NEw Zealander here: I honestly don’t understand what you are talking about. The culture of “sue”ing doesn’t really exist here. I wouldn’t guess there was a lot in common between NZ and Ozzie: we laugh or cry about what happens over in Oz. No idea about Canada.
Well they did block free movement in the country for a few months, not really sure how legal that was tbh.