|
IGIS Annual Report 1999-00 |
IGIS Annual Report 1999-00
DEFENCE SIGNALS DIRECTORATE
COMPLAINTS AND INQUIRIES
241. The level of complaints about DSD is generally low due to the fact that DSD collects foreign signals intelligence by technical means. It is therefore unlikely that members of the Australian public would have any direct dealings with DSD.
242. One complaint about DSD was carried over from the 1998-99 reporting period (see paragraphs 144-146 of last year's report). As mentioned at paragraph 24, I found no evidence of any improper or illegal activity by DSD.
243. One new complaint was made during 1999-2000. It is summarised at paragraphs 245-246.
244. Towards the end of the reporting period I received a request from the Minister for Defence to conduct an inquiry into a matter involving DSD. This inquiry is continuing.
Alleged possible harassment of DSD employee
245. In July 1999 I received a letter from an employee of DSD who was concerned that his home phone may have been illegally tampered with or monitored. While the complainant did not make this allegation against a particular organisation, ASIO is the only agency under my jurisdiction that has the legal authority to conduct telecommunications interception activities within Australia. Following a preliminary inquiry into this matter, the complainant was advised that there was no evidence of illegality or impropriety on the part of ASIO.
246. The complainant was also concerned that foreign contact reports that he had prepared while working in DSD may not have been handled appropriately. Based on my inquiries I was satisfied the information lodged with DSD Security was handled routinely and through the correct channels. There was no evidence that this information was handled or used inappropriately.