‘Police and security agencies will be given unprecedented "sneak and peek" powers to search the homes and computers of suspects without their knowledge under legislation to go before Federal Parliament next week.

The extensive powers - which also give federal police the right to monitor communications equipment without an interceptions warrant - come amid growing public disquiet about counter-terrorism powers following the bungled handling of the Mohamed Haneef case.

Under the laws, officers from the federal police and other agencies would be able to execute "delayed notification warrants", allowing them to undertake searches, seize equipment and plant listening devices in businesses and homes.

Police and security officers will be able to assume false identities to gain entry and conduct the surreptitious searches.

But the person affected by the raid does not have to be informed for at least six months, and can remain in the dark for 18 months if the warrant is rolled over.

The warrant is to be issued by the head of a police service or security agency without the approval of a judicial officer. It can also be extended for more than 18 months with the sanction of the minister.

The lack of judicial oversight was justified by the Minister for Justice and Customs, David Johnston, on the grounds that a court or judicial officer might leak news of the warrant.’

New Secret Search Powers

Meanwhile, our feral police are refusing to reveal the extent of their surveillance in Australia, but the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act gives police the power to monitor virtually all internet activity provided they first obtain the warrant.

Right now, anything we do using the internet can be monitored by law enforcement agencies, it doesn't matter whether it's emails, web browsing, chat rooms, whatever.

But under the new terror laws, the warrant can be issued by the head of a police service or a security agency, bypassing judicial oversight.

What kind of “democracy” is it when the plod are exempt from judicial scrutiny? If the plod don't trust the judges, how are we supposed to trust the police?

Nigel Waters, chairman of the Australian Privacy Foundation's policy committee, accused the Government of rushing unprecedented surveillance legislation through Parliament before the public had the chance to work out how the provisions applied to new technologies.

"There is no doubt that there is significant erosion taking place in the privacy of telecommunications & internet communications," he said.

Surprise, surprise …..