The watchdog for the Security Service has said it is time to look into amending the law regulating Malta’s intelligence agency.
“The law needs revisiting in quite a few areas but it’s a delicate task because we’re talking about national security. It’s a sensitive question that should be at the fore of any such discussion about the law. But yes, I believe the law needs a bit of touching up,” Judge Frank Camilleri told The Sunday Times of Malta.
The former judge, who has been Commissioner of the Security Service (re-appointed every two years) since 2000, was reluctant to give specific examples.
“I cannot really be interacting much with the press in the sense that the law is quite clear that I am only answerable to the Prime Minister,” he said.
Judge Camilleri is the single overseeing authority over the Malta Security Service, which is the only body legally authorised to use spying techniques such as tapping e-mails or phone calls to investigate organised crime and terrorism.
His comments come in the wake of disclosures by telecoms giant Vodafone that its networks are completely accessible to intelligence agencies in the countries where it operates.
The law needs revisiting but it’s a delicate task as we’re talking about national security
In its first tell-all Law Enforcement Disclosure Report, launched on the first anniversary of the disclosures of whistleblower Edward Snowden – who revealed widespread surveillance of the internet by US intelligence agencies – Vodafone underscored that intelligence agencies have direct access to its networks.
Debate is rekindled
The document did not really reveal anything new about the situation in Malta. Times of Malta had reported on the installation of equipment that would give the agency access to all communications back in 2005. However, it rekindled a debate about overseeing of the security service in Malta.
The blanket provisions for confidentiality referred to by Judge Camilleri are potentially one of the hottest points for discussion.
As Commissioner for the Security Service, he has full authority to scrutinise the agency and demand any information on current or past investigations. However, the 1996 Security Service Act also curtails his ability to bring a problem to public attention as he should only report to the Prime Minister.
He is expected to deliver a yearly report on the agency, which is then presented to the Security Committee – made up of the Prime Minister, who chairs it, the Opposition leader, the Home Affairs and Foreign Affairs Ministers and the Head of the Security Service.
However, the law empowers the Prime Minister to ask him to leave out information that he deems not to be in the national interest.
Moreover, the commissioner is specifically exempt from giving evidence, even in court. This means, for instance, that Parliament may not summon him for reassurances, as happened in the UK last month.
Retired judge Sir Mark Waller, who is the watchdog for MI5 (domestic security), MI6 (foreign security) and GCHQ (Cyber Security), initially refused to answer questions before the home affairs select committee but was eventually formally summoned.
After the Vodafone exposé, the Home Affairs Ministry said it was analysing the Security Service Act to see if the oversight could be fixed.
Like the commissioner, a number of lawyers who spoke to The Sunday Times of Malta argued the law was due for revision particularly because the technological capabilities for spying available to intelligence agencies were today much greater than when the agency was set up.