Tap Act raises questions about supervision and scope in the Senate

The Senate has discussed the proposal for the new Intelligence and Security Services Act, also known as the ‘wiretapping act’. In doing so, various parties raised questions about the supervision and scope of the new powers in the proposal.

For example, some parties, including proponents of the law, refer to a letter sent to the Senate by regulator Ctivd at the end of March. In it, the organization indicates that there are still four ‘thresholds’ that could hinder effective supervision of the powers of the AIVD and MIVD. For example, the regulator mentions that additional measures are needed to prevent large amounts of data from being collected from persons who are not a target. In addition, there would be a ‘supervision gap’.

Parties that voted in favor of the bill in the House of Representatives, including the PVV, the CDA and the PvdA, are asking the government to respond to the letter from the regulator. Opposition parties such as D66 and the SP express their concerns about the proposed law, as they have done in the House of Representatives. They also want the government to respond to the concerns expressed by the Ctivd. The PvdA also asks the government to respond to the comments of the Council of State, which had doubts about the effectiveness of the supervision.

The party also wants to know from the government whether it agrees with GroenLinks that the term ‘research assignment-oriented interception of cable-bound communication’ can be misleading. This term is commonly referred to by critics of the bill as the “dragnet,” which allows intelligence agencies to intercept large amounts of communications data. Earlier, the government made it clear that this can happen ‘on a large scale and systematically’. D66 is also concerned about the definition of the term. The VVD says about the bill that ‘on balance’ it strikes a good balance between security and privacy.

The House of Representatives voted in February in favor of the bill for the new wiretapping law. Now it is the turn of the Senate. An answer to the questions posed by the parties is expected within four weeks.