Keeping watch on the snoopers
Of the myriad annual reports to the legislature on the operations of government, one assured of close attention from those concerned with the right to privacy is that of the watchdog on official snooping on private citizens.

Of the myriad annual reports to the legislature on the operations of government, one assured of close attention from those concerned with the right to privacy is that of the watchdog on official snooping on private citizens. That is to be expected, given the troubled birth of a law to put phone-tapping and covert surveillance by enforcement agencies on a sound legal footing. The government forced it through Legco in marathon sittings in 2006, without accepting a single amendment out of 200 put forward by pan-democrats to safeguard against abuse.
The report by the Commissioner on Interception of Communications and Covert Surveillance, Mr Justice Darryl Saw, gives a snapshot of compliance with the law by four agencies which were granted 1,412 spying applications last year, mostly for phone-tapping - police, the Independent Commission Against Corruption, customs and immigration.
He found 10 breaches or "irregularities". This may not seem many in operations that led to the arrest of 261 suspects, and Saw was satisfied that none was deliberate. Nonetheless the disclosure every year of repeated violations underlines the importance of a watchdog. And one of those last year was deemed "a serious" omission from an application of an assessment of the likelihood of uncovering material protected by legal professional privilege or journalistic materials.
So far, however, Saw has been too reliant on disclosure of transgressions - such as overstepping the time limit for wiretapping or surveillance - by the agency concerned. He has, rightly in our view, called for the law to be amended to allow him to listen to intercepted materials, to help expose and deter malpractice and assess excuses for transgressions. The government began moves to give him more power after a five-year review of the legislation in 2011. The Security Bureau said last year the law-drafting process had begun. For the sake of public confidence in an important weapon against crime, there is a need for a greater sense of urgency.