Urgency likely as House resumes S.I.S. bill debate

Press, 28 October 1977, Page 1

Urgency likely as House resumes S.I.S. bill debate

Discussion on the Security Intelligence Service Amendnr nt Bill may dominate today’s sitting of Parliament, which begins at 9 a.m. and would normally entl at 1 pan., says the Parliamentary reporter of “The Press.”

The bill occupies thirteenth position on the Order Paper but this can be varied at a few minutes notice by the Prime Minister (Mr Muldoon), who is known to be anxious to move the legislation forward.

The item in the Order Paper referring to the bill carries the notation “that the bill be referred to the Statutes Revision Committee.” A vote in favour of this would be contrary to the wish of Mr Muldoon.

The second-reading debate on the measure has been completed and the task which normally would be facing the House is the clause-by-clause committee stage. This would include an examination of all amendments, including several important ones by Government members, notably one by Mr M. J. Minogue (Hamilton West). There has been some meeting of minds on various aspects of the bill but, although its opponents describe it as marginally better, there is no clear consensus view on acceptability.

The Opposition is not expected to yield, which could mean slow movement, with many divisions. Urgency is expected to be taken. This could mean that Parliament could sit on through tonight and Saturday but no member on either side is prepared

to comment on this possibility.

The Government announced yesterday further proposed changes to the bill, including a new definition of the term “terrorism,” reports the Press Association. Terrorism has been redefined as “planning, threatening, using, or attempting to use, violence to coerce, deter, or intimidate the lawful authority of the State in New Zealand or the community throughout or in any area of New Zealand for the purpose of furthering any political aim.” Originally, terrorism had been defined as “advocating, threatening, or using violence” for those purposes.

A new section is added to the bill dealing with the functions of the S.I.S. This provides that it shall not be a function of the S.I.S. to institute surveillance of any person or class of persons by reason only of his or their involvement in lawful protest or dissent concerned with any matter affecting the constitution. laws, or government of New Zealand. The bill was earlier changed to provide that, before the Minister in charge of the S.I.S. issues an interception warrant, he must be satisfied by evidence on oath that the communication to be intercepted does not relate to

communications between a doctor and his patient, a lawyer and his client, and a clergyman and his penitent.

The clause is to be further amended to provide that the only person, apart from the director of the 5.1.5., who may apply for an interception warrant is the person for the time being acting as the director.

The bill is also amended to make sure that no information stored in the computer system established under the Wanganui Computer Centre Act, 1976, shall be intercepted or seized. It makes it an offence to gain or attempt to gain access to that computer system by means not authorised by the act. The section of the bill dealing with reports is amplified to provide that the annual review shall extend to all warrants that were in force at any time during the year to which the report relates.

A new clause which was added during the second reading has been rewritten to spell out more fully what is to be done in respect of any communication that is intercepted or seized.

It is provided that the person making the interception or seizing shall, as soon as practicable, destroy any copy of that communication and any record with the exception

of information relating directly or indirectly to the detection of activities prejudicial to security or comprising foreign intelligence information essential to security. Communications which have been seized from mail in transit are also required to be returned to the mail for normal delivery. In the case of any other letter, document, or thing which has been intercepted or seized, it must be returned to the place from which it was taken if the director considers that it is practicable to do so. It is also provided that, where the director considers that the return of any communication to the mail might lead to consequences that would endanger life or property, the director shall consult the Solicitor-General and dispose of it as the Solicitor-General requires. Three further amendments proposed during the second-reading debate on the bill are retained. State servants cannot be directed to assist security agents in their interception activities and journalists are to be permitted to reveal the identity of former S.I.S. members. Another amendment makes it an offence for a person knowingly to disclose information, other than in the course of his duty, which he knows was gained as a result of an interception or seizing.