New Zealand dismisses major internet companies’ disputes with new spying law
Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Yahoo wrote earlier this month to
Communications Minister Amy Adams to voice their trepidations
about demands they must comply with in the Telecommunications
Interception Capability and Security Bill, The New Zealand Herald
The bill demands the companies and other network operators must allow New Zealand spy agencies a certain path to monitor user communications. The law’s provisions require the head of national intelligence agencies to have interception capabilities of “over the top” providers like the four companies that offer services openly online.
These interception abilities "would present serious legal
conflicts for companies headquartered in other countries,”
the four wrote to Adams.
In addition, the companies said the surveillance models in the new legislation, a companion to the Government Communications and Security Bureau (GCSB) Act, were inconsistent with those of the other four countries in the “Five Eyes” spying network - Australia, Canada, the UK and the US.
The companies said the eavesdropping capabilities of the new
legislation are redundant given current international law allows
New Zealand access to the information it wants. They encouraged
New Zealand to consider an “alternative approach” to the
new law, by engaging
US counterparts for information and by setting up a “single
point of contact” for information requests of overseas
Minister Adams responded saying “a proper administrative process” was in place for the overseas companies that would ease the burden of interception and ensure legal conflicts between New Zealand and their home countries would be addressed.
She went on to say the bill would not put onerous legal burdens on the companies and that the alternate path the companies suggested would not suffice “to achieve the objectives of the bill.”
Though Adams did announce the removal of Clause 39 in the legislation, which allows the government to block an overseas-based company from offering services in New Zealand should they not comply with the bill’s interception demands in a way that imperils national security.