https - hopefully not too stupid a question

[Peter Fairbrother]

Francis Davey wrote:
> 2012/6/18 Peter Fairbrother <zenadsl6186 at zen.co.uk>:
>> For example, clause 11 - when does it ever get used? When does an
>> authorisation need Judicial approval?
>>
> 
> When it is granted by a "relevant person", i.e. a local authority
> officer. The idea, so I gather, is that clause 11 is meant to be a
> "good" point of the bill because it requires local government to
> obtain judicial approval before they can use their authorisations.
> 
> The secretary of state can add others to the list.
> 
> I make no comment on whether that is or is not a "good" thing, but it
> seems clear enough.

You miss the point - when does it ever get used? When does an 
authorisation need Judicial approval?

Under the draft Act that is, rather than under some putative future SI.

>> And notices can only be served on telecommunications operators? 9(3)(d)?
> 
> I'm not sure I see the confusion. Who else would you be serving a
> clause 9 notice on? 

I have rather arbitrarily decided that for the rest of today you are to 
be considered a shill and dupe of the HO.

Mostly because it's easier to do than answering your question - which 
does have an answer, or did when I posted the above  -  but I can't 
remember the answer anymore.

I accept that other people may get their hands on
> communications data, but in practice it will almost always be in the
> hands of a telecommunications operator. Hopefully you read my blog
> post so you will see that means almost everyone.
> 


Not yet, but I will read it, I rather want to work out what the draft 
bill actually says first.

And sans "explanatory notes", which I have not read. They have no legal 
effect.

:)


-- Peter