Joe Sherlock (Cork East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 56: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the service providers the Garda Commissioner has written to pursuant to section 63 of the Criminal Justice (Terrorist Offences) Act 2005 instructing them to retain data as defined; if any service provider accessed the data held pursuant to section 63 of the Criminal Justice (Terrorist Offences) Act 2005; if so, the service providers which have done so and pursuant to which subsection or subsections of section 64 was it so accessed in each case; the number of times the data retained have been accessed under each subsection of section 64 and by which service providers; the safeguards he has instructed service providers to put in place to ensure that this data is not improperly accessed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29779/05]

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Part 7 — sections 61 to 67 — of the Criminal Justice (Terrorist Offences) Act 2005 provides for the retention of telecommunications data by communications service providers for the purposes of the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of crime, including terrorist offences, or the safeguarding of the security of the State. It would not be in the public interest to reveal the number or identities of the service providers, if any, which have been requested in writing by the Garda Commissioner to retain, for a period of three years, traffic data or location data or both.

A service provider shall not access any data so retained save in accordance with the conditions set out in paragraphs 64(1)(a) to (e) of the 2005 Act. Inasmuch as retained data may be accessed by the Garda Síochána, it would not be in the public interest to reveal either the number of requests, if any, made to disclose any data so retained or the identities of the service providers to which such requests, if any, have been made.

I do not have — and could not have — information on such matters as it relates to disclosure requests from other legitimate sources, such as in accordance with a court order or at the request and with the consent of the person to whom the data relates.

On safeguards against the misuse of retained data, Part 7 of the 2005 Act extends the duties of the designated judge under the Interception of Postal Packets and Telecommunications Messages (Regulation) Act 1993 to the data retention provisions of this Part. In particular, the designated judge shall, inter alia, keep the operation of the provisions of Part 7 under review and ascertain whether the Garda Síochána and the Permanent Defence Forces are complying with its provisions.

Moreover, Part 7 of the 2005 Act also extends the duties of the complaints referee under the Interception of Postal Packets and Telecommunications Messages (Regulation) Act 1993 to the data retention provisions of this Part. In particular, the complaints referee shall investigate, on foot of a complaint alleging improper disclosure, whether, inter alia, any provision of section 64 was contravened in the disclosure request, if any.