The concern United Democrats leader Theo Heyliger expressed over authorities monitoring phone calls (see Saturday paper) was quickly dismissed by some as self-serving, because he is currently the subject of a bribery investigation. However, that seems a bit too easy.
This matter basically touches everyone. The rules say that a court order must be obtained before “wiretapping” specific suspects, but according to the Member of Parliament (MP), this not what happens in practice.
He claims that the Kingdom Detective Cooperation Team RST installed a system at local telecommunication companies allowing it to listen in on any conversation. When they hear something of interest permission to eavesdrop is then supposedly requested after the fact.
If the latter were indeed true it would certainly raise questions. Justice Minister Cornelius de Weever said he is not aware of such, but promised to get back to the MP.
It’s important that clarity be provided on the issue soonest by either the minister or the Prosecutor’s Office. After all, privacy is a key part of legal security and can – for example – affect the local investment climate.
Of course, a telephone conversation is usually between two persons, so in addition to the one being targeted in the investigation also those with whom they are communicating automatically come under scrutiny. Still, should this give rise to in turn tapping their other calls with third parties, that would require separate permission.
The need to get pre-approval from a judge and the related maximum four-week period were established for a reason. While law enforcement has understandably become more aggressive in combating ever-more-sophisticated organised and border-crossing crime with new tools like the Asset Recovery Team, individual and collective rights of citizens must remain well-protected.
