IP Bill Committee decision supports victims
We had a big victory in the IP Bill committee to keep para 54 (4). It is due to Roland Perry's and Richard Berry’s hard work to champion the need for evidence for individuals vs just the state.
The Digital-Trust press release on when and how Internet connection records was useful to explain the issue in plain language. It’s very technical and I’m grateful for Roland’s technical brain on such complicated issues. But the long and short is that it will make it much easier to get evidence for victims who are being targeted by another individual.
Here is the Hansards report on yesterday’s vote
I am grateful for the examples that the Digital-Trust gave to all members of the Committee. The trust’s example is powerful. Many stalkers sadly indulge in sending unwanted gifts to their victims. For example, they may habitually order flowers to make the point that they are still there. The victim may not want such gifts, but they are part of the stalking behaviour.
The internet connection record that discloses that someone had gone to a florist is innocuous, but it could be vital lead evidence in building a picture of someone’s stalking and harassing behaviour. That is why the Digital-Trust strongly supports clause 54(4). It can see the operational merit in ensuring that such purposes are included. It is a stark and clear example of the dangers of over-limiting the criteria within which the investigating authorities can act.