Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Regulations 2017
Form 4F—Named person warrant for communiForm 4F—Named person warrant for community safety supervision order—telecommunications devices
Start here
Get a plain-English read of Form 4F—Named person warrant for communi
Turn the raw legal text into a practical explanation grounded in Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Regulations 2017.
Form 4F—Named person warrant for community safety supervision order—telecommunications devices
Commonwealth of Australia
Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979
NAMED PERSON WARRANT FOR community safety supervision order—TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES
| Particular person(named person) | [full known name, other known names, other known identifying information (e.g. date of birth)] |
|---|---|
| Particular telecommunications *device/*devices | [For each telecommunication device, the unique number assigned to the device (if known) and other known unique identifying factors] |
| Applicant agency | [name] |
1 Authorisation
(1) I, [name], *an eligible Judge/*a nominated ART member within the meaning of the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 (the Act), acting under section 46A of the Act, authorise interceptions of communications made by means of the particular telecommunications *device/*devices that the named person mentioned above is using, or is likely to use. (2) I am satisfied, on the basis of the information given to me by the applicant agency, that: (a) Division 3 of Part 2‑5 of the Act has been complied with in relation to the application for this warrant; and *(b) because of urgent circumstances, it was necessary to make the application by telephone; and (c) there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that the named person is using, or is likely to use, more than one telecommunications service; and (d) a community safety supervision order is in force (including because of section 6UA of the Act) in relation to the named person; and (e) information that would be likely to be obtained by intercepting under a warrant communications made by means of the particular telecommunications *device/*devices that the named person is using, or is likely to use, would be likely to substantially assist in connection with: *(i) achieving a Part 9.10 object; or *(ii) determining whether the community safety supervision order, or any succeeding community safety supervision order, has been, or is being, complied with.
Note: For paragraph (2)(d), section 6UA of the Act deems community safety supervision orders to be in force if they have been made but not yet come into force.
(3) I am satisfied, on the basis of the information given to me by the applicant agency, that the warrant should be issued having regard to the following matters only: (a) how much the privacy of any person or persons would be likely to be interfered with by intercepting under a warrant communications made by means of the particular telecommunications *device/*devices used, or likely to be used, by the named person; (b) how much the information referred to in paragraph (2)(e) would be likely to assist in connection with: (i) achieving a Part 9.10 object; or (ii) determining whether the community safety supervision order, or any succeeding community safety supervision order, has been, or is being, complied with; (c) to what extent methods (including the use of a warrant issued under section 46 of the Act) for: (i) achieving a Part 9.10 object; or (ii) determining whether the community safety supervision order, or any succeeding community safety supervision order, has been, or is being, complied with; that do not involve the use of a warrant issued under section 46A of the Act in relation to the named person have been used by, or are available to, the applicant agency; (d) how much the use of such methods would be likely to assist in connection with: (i) achieving a Part 9.10 object; or (ii) determining whether the community safety supervision order, or any succeeding community safety supervision order, has been, or is being, complied with; (e) how much the use of such methods would be likely to prejudice: (i) achieving a Part 9.10 object; or (ii) determining whether the community safety supervision order, or any succeeding community safety supervision order, has been, or is being, complied with; whether because of delay or for any other reason; (f) whether intercepting under a warrant communications referred to in paragraph (a) would be the method that is likely to have the least interference with any person’s privacy; *(g) the possibility that the person in relation to whom the community safety supervision order is in force has committed, is committing, or will commit a serious violent or sexual offence; (h) the possibility that the person in relation to whom the community safety supervision order is in force: (i) has contravened, is contravening or will contravene the community safety supervision order; or (ii) will contravene a succeeding community safety supervision order; *(i) [if the applicant agency is an interception agency of Victoria] any submissions made by the Victorian PIM under section 44A of the Act to me; *(j) [if the applicant agency is an interception agency of Queensland] any submissions made by the Queensland PIM under section 45 of the Act to me. (4) I am satisfied that: *there are no other practicable methods available to the applicant agency at the time of making the application to identify the telecommunications services used, or likely to be used, by the named person. *interception of communications made to or from a telecommunications service used, or likely to be used, by the named person would not otherwise be practicable. (5) This warrant is issued on the basis of the community safety supervision order mentioned in paragraph (2)(d), details of which are specified in the following table.