Defence Imagery and Geospatial Organisation

What DIGO Does

DIGO is the lead agency responsible for the acquisition and analysis of satellite and other imagery and for the development, acquisition and exploitation of geospatial data, in support of Australia’s defence and national interests.

This means that DIGO collects and analyses images of foreign and domestic subjects (eg. landforms, waterways, disputed territories etc.), and develops mapping and imagery intelligence products for the Australian Defence Force and a range of other Commonwealth clients.

DIGO also has the capacity to combine imagery with other available sources of data to prepare highly accurate topographical maps and other aids that are of value in the preparation of plans relevant to national defence and security.

Further information about DIGO can be found on the Department of Defence website.

Brief History

While DIGO is a relatively new organisation, Australia’s involvement in imagery intelligence is not. From 1964 until 1998, responsibility for imagery intelligence related matters fell within the purview of DIO and its predecessor bodies.

In the 1990s a strong case was made to the government for the development of an indigenous imagery intelligence capability. These arguments were based on rapid technological advancements, the lowering cost of access to this technology, and the increased contribution Australia could make to various liaison relationships.

The government ultimately accepted these arguments and in 1998 the imagery intelligence function was excised from DIO and transformed into a new body, the Australian Imagery Organisation (AIO).

Over the next few years, as AIO progressively separated itself from DIO, the alignment between AIO’s imagery related activities and the geospatial work of the Defence Topographic Agency came into sharper focus.

Early in 2000, the Department of Defence commissioned an external study which examined and made recommendations on how these important functions might best be structured. The key recommendation ﬂowing from this study was that the AIO, the Defence Topographic Agency, and the Directorate of Strategic Military Geographic Information should be merged into a single body.

The resulting structure, the Defence Imagery and Geospatial Organisation, came into being on 8 November 2000.

Accountability Arrangements

Prior to DIGO coming into being, it was recognised that the IGIS Act would need to be amended at some point, to fully incorporate DIGO within the remit of the IGIS.

Following discussions between this office and the foundation Director of DIGO, it was agreed that until such time as this occurred, the Inspector-General should oversee the activities of DIGO as if the IGIS Act had already been amended. The government endorsed this approach and this situation pertained throughout the reporting period.

Flood Review

As mentioned in ‘The Year in Review’ chapter, Mr Philip Flood conducted a significant inquiry into Australia’s intelligence agencies in the later part of 2003–04 and delivered the report of his inquiry to the government in July 2004.

Mr Flood viewed DIGO’s rapid development and delivery of a unique range of products during a period of high operational activity in a very positive light, but also identified several issues which he believed required attention so that DIGO could fulfil its potential. To this end, Mr Flood made the following recommendations in respect of DIGO:

'The functions and ministerial accountabilities of DIGO should be formalised in legislation by amendments to the Intelligence Services Act 2001. Similarly, the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security Act 1986 should be amended to include scrutiny of DIGO on a basis comparable with that which applies to DSD and ASIS.” ¹⁶

'The mandate of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on ASIO, ASIS and DSD (PJCAAD) should be extended to all of Australia’s intelligence agencies—that is, it should cover also, ONA, DIO and DIGO on the same basis it at presently covers ASIO, ASIS and DSD.” ¹⁷

'A Foreign Intelligence Coordination Committee (FICC) should be established should under the chairmanship of the Director-General of ONA comprising the heads of ASIO, ASIS, DSD, DIGO and the AFP and Deputy Secretary-level representation from the Departments of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, and Foreign Affairs and Trade.”¹⁸

'The Defence Imagery and Geospatial Organisation should develop and implement a comprehensive customer engagement strategy.”¹⁹

The government accepted these recommendations shortly after receiving Mr Flood’s report and DIGO has been working actively to implement them.

ISLA Bill 2005

The principal vehicle for giving effect to the above recommendations is the ISLA Bill which was introduced into parliament on 16 June 2005.

The incorporation of DIGO into the ISA regime will effect a major change to DIGO’s operational environment in that:

It will require DIGO to publicly set out its functions (in the same way that the functions of ASIS and DSD are specified in the ISA).
DIGO’s collection activities will be limited in accordance with the statement of its functions.
The Minister for Defence will be required to issue written directions to the Director DIGO in respect of those matters which require a ministerial authorisation.
The Minister for Defence rather than the Director DIGO will be required to authorise certain collection activities.
The Minister for Defence must make rules regulating the communication and retention by DIGO of intelligence information concerning Australian persons.

I engaged with the Director DIGO during the reporting period on these and related issues, to ensure that the implementation of these proposed changes could occur with the minimum of fuss. I believe that DIGO is positioning itself well to make the transition to the ISA regime, should the ISLA Bill pass through parliament.

Inspection Activities

I visited DIGO headquarters every three months during the reporting period.

The purpose of these visits was twofold:

to meet with the Director DIGO and his senior policy and legal staff, to discuss issues of common interest, and
to review those of DIGO’s intelligence collection activities that may have had some impact upon Australians or Australian entities.

These meetings with the Director DIGO and his senior staffwere extremely useful in gaining a better appreciation of what DIGO does and how it goes about its business. While much time has been devoted to discussing the impact upon DIGO of the implementation of Mr Flood’s recommendations, the Director has also briefed me on a range of operational and management activities.

The second purpose of our periodic visits to DIGO’s headquarters is to actively monitor those tasking requests it receives/actions which might impact upon Australian persons or interests.

The scope for collection of imagery which could intrude upon the privacy of Australians is very limited and occurs subject to the Rules Governing DIGO’s Activities in Respect of Australia and Australians. These rules embody similar principles to the ASIS and DSD privacy rules but will necessarily need to be reviewed, should the ISLA Bill be passed.

During the reporting period we raised several procedural issues with the Director DIGO in respect of DIGO’s existing rules. Each approach received a timely and appropriate response. I was satisfied that all necessary approvals had been obtained in respect of all tasking involving Australian locations and that DIGO’s records are being kept in good order.

Training

During the reporting period, OIGIS made three presentations to staffbased at DIGO’s Canberra headquarters on the role and functions of our office. I also made two presentations to DIGO staffbased at the Geospatial Analysis Centre in Bendigo, Victoria.

Complaints and Inquiries

The office received no complaints about DIGO during the reporting period.

Footnotes
16 Flood, p. 180. 17 ibid, p. 180. 18 ibid, p. 181. 19 ibid, p. 184.
17 ibid, p.180.
18 ibid, p.180.
19 ibid, p.184.

content