Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone
After a discussion with a lawyer friend (not australia, canada, so tangentially related), the &quot;presumption of innocence&quot; that would not obligate this person to have or produce a key for whatever gibberish someone sends to their devices, is what&#x27;s known in legal circles as a &quot;principle of fundamental justice,&quot; and it is not a right that is either absolute or inaliable the way that american rights are set up.<p>One doesn&#x27;t need to agree with the persons cause to recognize this is another extreme overstepping of authority on the part of that government to mandate that the people who communicate with the person subject to this order may also not protect their own commuications from interception, and that the person subject to the order must somehow produce a key for whatever data gets sent to him.<p>Given the cynical application of laws and their moderating charter exceptions in places like Australia and Canada over the last few years, I could forsee a new republican movement emerging in commonwealth countries, as it&#x27;s pretty clear CAN&#x2F;AUS&#x2F;NZ have dispensed with notions of fundamental justice, and have a &quot;so sue me,&quot; approach to legislation and governance, as this stuff is just too stupid to be reasoned with. The language means nothing, the principles mean nothing. It&#x27;s no longer about tech, it&#x27;s about what our options are when the state has demonstrated official contempt for the people it ostensibly serves.