Article written by Lauredhel

Lauredhel is an Australian woman and mother with a disability. She blogs about social justice, reproductive justice, freedom from violence, the use and misuse of language, medical science, being disabled, her garden, and whatever else pops into her head.

Lauredhel also blogs at FWD/Forward (feminists with disabilities), scribbles at her personal dreamwidth journal Selective and Arbitrary, and co-moderates Hollaback Australia. She joined Hoyden About Town in 2007.

7 responses to “WA Police using Smartrider public transport data to track people”

  1. Deborah

    Looks pretty dodgy to me, but I don’t know how the privacy law works in WA. I wonder if I could fill out a form and get the information? It doesn’t seem like a very hard test to meet to me. I suppose if good enough protections were built into the system, it could be an acceptable way for police to gather information, but I would want the test to be quite difficult to meet – maybe a court order rather than just filling out a form.

    The passport analogy doesn’t work at all.

  2. mel  p

    jesus. I’m normally a bit sceptical of the tin-hat-wearing crowd who like to yell ‘invasion of privacy’ every 5 minutes, but in this instance, sign me up. I really want the cops to have to try a bit harder to prove they need that information, and to have to come up with a subpoena to get it.

  3. DeusExMacintosh

    Private transport is no protection.

    In the UK our police are already using Automatic Numberplace Recognition Cameras (ANRP) to map people’s car journeys and keep it in a database for five years with no legal or judicial oversight whatsoever (even the information commissioner says it doesn’t fall under his remit).

  4. Liam

    On privacy in WA public sector agencies, which like all State public sector agencies are not covered under Federal privacy legislation:

    The State public sector in Western Australia does not currently have a legislative privacy regime. Various confidentiality provisions cover government agencies and some of the privacy principles are provided for in the Freedom of Information Act 1992.

    Not that I’m a lawyer, but yes, it looks like the Privacy Act does not apply.
    In NSW (where I live) we have the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 which certainly would protect individuals’ information from being accessed, say, by Deborah filling out a form as she suggested at comment #1, but the Police and various other investigative agencies (ICAC, PIC etc.) are specifically exempt from the privacy principles.
    When our Supreme Court judge Marcus Einfeld was convicted of perjury a year or two ago, I recall that some of the crucial bits of evidence were speeding camera, toll road and mobile phone records. Mind you we can also be rather less subtle over here on the East Coast—after the 2005 riots there were reports of Police officers simply threatening people on the Cronulla Line train with arrest if they didn’t hand over their mobile phones to check their text messages.

  5. Mary

    Re recording car journeys, I don’t have a link to hand, but my understanding is that in NSW at least speed cameras and/or Safe-T Cams (the ones used to take images of heavy vehicles to check if the drivers are spending too long at the wheel) do take an image of every passing vehicle and that this data is kept for some time and has been used as evidence in criminal cases. In particular, an image of a car on the Hume Highway en route from Sydney to Canberra destroyed someone’s alibi in a murder case at some point.

    Whether the licence plates are automatically interpreted and data mined, or whether the footage is only examined in the event of wanting to use it as evidence, I don’t know.

Switch to our mobile site