Traditional Chinese Simplified Chinese Email this article news.gov.hk
LCQ2: Telecommunications interception order
*******************************************

     Following is a question by the Hon James To and a written reply by the Secretary for Security, Mr Lai Tung-kwok, in the Legislative Council today (February 24):

Question:

     Under section 33(1) of the Telecommunications Ordinance (Cap. 106), the Chief Executive (CE) may order that any class of messages shall be intercepted (interception orders) for the purpose of providing or making available facilities reasonably required for: (i) the detection or discovery of any telecommunications service provided in contravention of any provision of the Ordinance or any regulation made under the Ordinance or any of the terms or conditions of a licence granted under the Ordinance, or (ii) the execution of prescribed authorisations for telecommunications interception that may from time to time be issued or renewed under the Interception of Communications and Surveillance Ordinance (Cap. 589).  In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) of the number of interception orders made for the first aforesaid category of actions in each of the past four years, and the number of telecommunications companies or Internet service providers (ISPs) involved, with a breakdown by message transmission channel (e.g. fixed-line phones, mobile phones, e-mails, social media and instant messaging programs); if it cannot provide such figures, of the reasons for that;

(2) of the number of interception orders made for the second aforesaid category of actions each year since the commencement of Cap. 589, and the number of telecommunications companies or ISPs involved, with a breakdown by message transmission channel; if such figures cannot be provided, of the reasons for that;

(3) among the interception orders mentioned in (1) and (2) of the respective numbers of orders made by CE (i) on his own motion, and (ii) at the request of government departments (and the government departments making such requests); and

(4) whether it has formulated an appropriate mechanism and procedure for the making of interception orders by CE to facilitate the monitoring by the public and to prevent abuse, with a view to protecting the personal privacy of the public?

Reply:

President,

     Section 33(1) of the Telecommunications Ordinance (TO) (Cap. 106) provides that the Chief Executive (CE) may order that any class of messages shall be intercepted for the purpose of providing or making available facilities reasonably required for:
 
(a) the detection or discovery of any telecommunications service provided in contravention of any provision of the TO or any regulation made under the TO or any of the terms or conditions of a licence granted under the TO; or

(b) the execution of prescribed authorisations for telecommunications interception that may from time to time be issued or renewed under the Interception of Communications and Surveillance Ordinance (ICSO) (Cap. 589).  

     Section 33(2) provides that an order under section 33(1) shall not of itself authorise the obtaining of the contents of any individual message.  

     After consulting the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau, we set out below our reply to each part of the question:

(1) In the past four years, the CE did not make any order pursuant to section 33(1)(a) of the TO.

(2) and (3) The CE's exercise of power under section 33(1)(b) of the TO relates to sensitive operational arrangement in connection with provision of facilities required for authorised covert operations under the ICSO.  As such, we cannot provide the relevant statistics.

(4) The CE has exercised the power under section 33 of the TO in strict accordance with the law, and such an order shall be only for the purpose of providing or making available facilities reasonably required of the operations referred to in section 33(1).  Section 33(2) of the TO also stipulates that the order under section 33(1) shall not of itself authorise the obtaining of contents of any individual message.  Hence there is no question of interference with the privacy of communications.   

Ends/Wednesday, February 24, 2016
Issued at HKT 15:20

NNNN

Print this page