Evaluation committee: Wiv needs more guarantees for collecting bulk data
The Intelligence and Security Services Act does not provide sufficient guarantees for the careful handling of bulk data. There is too much difference in different types of interceptions of such data. An evaluation committee recommends changing this.
This is stated in a final report of the Evaluation Committee for the Intelligence and Security Services Act. He looked at the operation of the Wiv. This law was passed in 2017 and regulates, among other things, how the AIVD and MIVD may collect data. The Wiv is evaluated every two years. According to the committee, the Wiv generally works well, but there are a number of points for improvement.
The most important point for improvement is that the different types of data collection must be aligned. During the introduction of the Act, much attention was paid to the so-called OOG interception, an abbreviation for Investigation Assignment-oriented Interception. This is a form of data collection with which bulk data can be tapped from the cable. The controversial point in the law is also known as the ‘dragnet’. Strict requirements apply to the collection of such data; for example, the Minister of the Interior must give permission in advance and an independent committee called the TIB conducts a legitimacy test in advance. But intelligence agencies can collect bulk data sets in other ways. This concerns so-called ‘register bulk data’. That is data that is not about behaviour, but from ‘identifiable characteristics’. The evaluation committee cites as an example collections of e-mail addresses or registrations with government institutions such as the Chamber of Commerce or the Vehicle Registration Register.
Less strict guarantees apply to the collection of the latter group of data. The law does not specifically refer to ‘bulk data’, but the evaluation committee does recommend including this. “Now the law regulates the collection and processing of this bulk data in different ways, depending on the authority with which bulk data is collected. That makes no sense, because ultimately it concerns the same sensitive data,” the committee writes.
More guarantees should also be included in the law for the exchange of data between foreign services. The committee warns that this was one of the concerns in society when the Wiv was discussed in 2016 and 2017. For cooperation with foreign services, the effectiveness of supervision should be taken into account, and this should be included in the law. The latter is not the case now. “If the legislator wants to allow cooperation with non-state groups, then the law must provide an explicit legal basis with the obligation to draw up a weighting note for this cooperation,” the report says.
The Committee also concludes that some terms in the law are too vague. When collecting data, for example, there is a guideline that this must be done ‘as specifically as possible’. “In practice, this sometimes leads to stalemates between the services and the regulators about the interpretation of legal concepts,” says the committee.
The evaluation committee also makes a number of other smaller recommendations, for example that the TIB should only look at the use of heavy powers and not all powers. Those recommendations should be implemented with a change in the law. The report was presented to the House of Representatives on Wednesday. There should then be a debate about what to do with the recommendations.