|
Public Notice CRTC 2000-97
|
|
Ottawa, 13 July 2000
|
|
Seeking comments on provision
of subscribers' telecommunications service provider identification information to law
enforcement agencies
|
|
Reference: 8665-C12-10/00 and Bell Canada Tariff
Notice 6479 |
|
This public notice seeks comments on a
proposal that law enforcement agencies and other government agencies, be provided the name
of a subscriber's telecommunications service provider upon the agency's request. |
|
Consensus report proposal
|
1. |
On 9 April 1999, the Network Security
Sub-Working Group of the CRTC Interconnection Steering Committee, now CRTC Industry
Steering Committee (CISC) submitted a consensus report to CISC. The consensus report was
developed by telecommunications carriers and public law enforcement agencies. If adopted,
the recommendation in this consensus report would allow law enforcement agencies and
government agencies that have the authority to issue warrants and/or subpoenas, access to
the name of the firm providing telecommunications services to a subscriber. |
2. |
The consensus report states as follows: |
|
Introduction - This report addresses the requirement for LECs' customers' Local Service
Provider Identification ("LSPID") information to be declared non-confidential
for the purpose of revealing such information to public law enforcement agencies. Public
law enforcement agencies are defined in Item 2175 of Bell Canada's General Tariff titled
Customer Name and Address, section 1(a) which states: "Customer Name and Address is a
service provided by the Company, upon request, to public law enforcement agencies only.
For the purpose of this tariff, public law enforcement agencies also include any
government organization (e. g. Fisheries) which has the legislated authority to issue
warrants and/or subpoenas". |
|
Principle - Public law enforcement agencies frequently require the names and addresses or
other specific information associated with telephone numbers uncovered during the course
of ongoing investigations. The traditional relationship between telephone numbers and
holders of central office (NXX) codes and suffix numbers, no longer exists with number
portability. To facilitate this process, the identification of the Local Service Provider
ID: (LSPID) becomes the first step. Therefore, the Network Security sub-working group has
reached a consensus on the appropriateness of making LSPID available to public law
enforcement agencies requesting such information.
|
|
Conclusion - The Network Security SWG is soliciting concurrence from the CRTC for
disclosure of LSPID (Local Service Provider Identification) information to be authorized
to public law enforcement agencies. Once this Consensus document is approved by the
Commission, the ILECs will amend their tariffs (Bell Canada General tariff Item 2175,
s.1(a) or equivalent) as applicable. Other LECs will file notice with the Commission to
specify to whom the LSPID information is to be provided, and under what conditions and
confidentiality requirements. |
|
Bell Canada Tariff Notice 6479
|
3. |
In addition to the consensus
report, Bell Canada has filed Tariff Notice (TN) 6479, dated
15 May 2000, which proposes a service similar to that discussed in the consensus
report. Accordingly, TN 6479 will be
considered as part of this proceeding. Comments received regarding TN 6479 will be made part of the record of this proceeding. |
|
Issues
|
4. |
The Commission is requesting
comments on TN 6479 and the
consensus report proposal generally, as well as with respect to the following issues. |
|
Is the information
confidential?
|
5. |
First, should the identity of a subscriber's
telecommunications service provider, in a multi-carrier environment, continue to be
considered confidential under the Terms of Service applicable to incumbent local exchange
carriers (ILECs) and the comparable confidentiality provisions applicable to competitive
local exchange carriers (CLECs)? |
6. |
In Telecom Decision CRTC 91-2, Criminal intelligence service of
Ontario - Release of information by Bell Canada, dated 12 February 1991, the
Commission denied an application relating to the release of technical information
regarding telecommunications facilities to law enforcement agencies in the absence of
prior legal authorization. The Commission concluded that the information in question was
"information kept by Bell Canada regarding the customer" within the meaning of
Article 11.1 of Bell Canada's Terms of Service. The Commission also stated the following:
|
|
In the Commission's view, provisions
concerning the release of customer information for the purposes of law enforcement must,
among other things, strike an appropriate balance between the subscriber's interest in
privacy and the public's interest in law enforcement. The Commission considers that the
current Article 11.1 strikes the appropriate balance between those interests.
|
|
As noted by Bell and by interveners in this
proceeding, subject to the Charter, Parliament has set out, in the Criminal Code
criteria relating to legal powers, such as authorizations, that may be exercised in
order to obtain information for law enforcement purposes. These criteria provide for the
control of law enforcement procedures through the judicial process. The Commission
considers Parliament and the courts to be the appropriate arenas for determining what are,
or should be, the proper procedures for authorizing the release of the information
described in CISO's applications. |
7. |
The Commission also notes that it has
established a Carrier Services Group regime in order to ensure, among other things, that
incumbent carriers treat information relating to their competitors' customers, including
service provider identification, in a confidential manner. |
|
Section 8 of the Canadian Charter
of Rights and Freedoms
|
8. |
The consensus report proposes that the
identity of a subscriber's telecommunications service provider would be communicated to
law enforcement agencies without any form of prior legal authorization, for example, a
warrant.
|
9. |
Section 8 of the Canadian Charter of
Rights and Freedoms provides that "everyone has the right to be secure against
unreasonable search or seizure". The Supreme Court of Canada, in Hunter v. Southam,
[1984] 2 S. C. R. 145, has indicated, in the context of section 8, that "an
assessment must be made as to whether in a particular situation the public's interest in
intruding on the individual's privacy in order to advance its goals, notably those of law
enforcement". Where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy, the courts have
established that s. 8 of the Charter generally requires prior authorization by a judicial
officer as a precondition to a criminal-law search, on a standard of reasonable and
probable grounds both as to the commission of an offence and as to the evidence to be
afforded by the search. In R. v. Plant, [1993] 3 S. C. R. 281, the
Supreme Court of Canada discussed factors to be used when considering informational
privacy in the context of section 8, including the nature of the information itself and
the nature of the relationship between the party releasing the information and a party
claiming confidentiality. The court stated that "it is fitting that s. 8 of the Charter
should seek to protect a biographical core of personal information which individuals in a
free and democratic society would wish to maintain and control from dissemination to the
state. This would include information which tends to reveal intimate details of the
lifestyle and personal choices of the individual". |
10. |
Accordingly, the Commission seeks comment on
whether, in a multi-carrier environment, there is a reasonable expectation of privacy with
respect to the identity of a subscriber's telecommunications service provider. Would
approval of the proposal amount to authorization of a warrantless search or seizure
contrary to section 8 of the Charter? |
|
Defining telecommunications service
|
11. |
The Commission notes, further, that if the
information in question should only be provided pursuant to a legal authorization such as
a search warrant, an issue may arise as to whether the service in question can be properly
characterized as a "telecommunications service" within the meaning of the Telecommunications
Act. This issue has been raised in the context of the proceeding initiated by Telecom
Public Notice CRTC 99-10, dated 16 March 1999 (and see
also Telecom Public Notice CRTC 99-17, dated
4 August 1999). The Commission expects to release a decision in this regard shortly.
|
|
Notice, consent, scope of use, and
safeguards
|
12. |
The Commission seeks comment on whether, if TN 6479 and the consensus report were approved, subscribers should be informed that
service provider identification information can be provided to law enforcement agencies
and other government agencies. If so, how should they be informed? Should subscribers be
given an opportunity to consent to the release of the information? |
13. |
To what extent, if any, should release of the
information be limited in terms of the purposes for which it would be used? What
safeguards, if any, should be imposed regarding the subsequent use and disclosure of the
information? |
|
Who would have access to the
information?
|
14. |
Finally, the Commission also seeks co**mment
regarding the number and type of agencies that would have access to service provider
identification information pursuant to TN 6479 and the
proposed consensus report. |
|
Procedure
|
15. |
Parties wishing to participate in this
proceeding must notify the Commission of their intention to do so by writing to the
Secretary General, CRTC, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0N2, fax: (819) 953-0795, by 3 August
2000. Parties are to indicate in the notice their email address, where available. If
parties do not have access to the Internet, they are to indicate in their notice whether
they wish to receive disk versions of hard copy filings. The Commission will issue as soon
as possible after the registration date, a complete list of interested parties and their
mailing address (including email address, if available), identifying those parties who
wish to receive disk versions. |
16. |
Interested parties to this proceeding may file
comments with the Commission, serving a copy on other interested parties by 24 August
2000. Submissions longer than five pages should include a summary. |
17. |
Interested parties may file reply comments
with the Commission, serving a copy on other interested parties, by 7 September
2000. |
18. |
Where a document is to be filed or served by a
specific date, the document must be actually received, not merely sent, by that date. |
19.
|
Parties wishing to file electronic versions
of their comments can do so by email or on diskette. The Commission email address is procedure@crtc.gc.ca.
|
20. |
Electronic submissions should be in the HTML
format. As an alternative, those making submissions may use "Microsoft Word" for
text and "Microsoft Excel" for spreadsheets.
|
21. |
Please number each paragraph of your
submission. In addition, please enter the line ***End of document***
following the last paragraph. This will help the Commission verify that the document has
not been damaged during transmission.
|
22. |
The Commission will make submissions filed in
electronic form available on its web site at www.crtc.gc.ca in the official language and format in which they are submitted. This will make
it easier for members of the public to consult the documents.
|
23. |
The Commission also encourages interested
parties to monitor the public examination file (and/or the Commission's web site) for
additional information that they may find useful when preparing their submissions.
|
24. |
Submissions may be examined or will be made
available promptly upon request at the following Commission offices during normal business
hours: |
|
Central Building
Les Terrasses de la Chaudière
1 Promenade du Portage, Room G-5
Hull, Quebec K1A 0N2
Tel: (819) 997-2429 - TDD: 994-0423
Fax: (819) 994-0218
|
|
Bank of Commerce Building
1809 Barrington Street
Suite 1007
Halifax, Nova Scotia B3J 3K8
Tel: (902) 426-7997 - TDD: 426-6997
Fax: (902) 426-2721
|
|
405 de Maisonneuve Blvd. East
2nd Floor, Suite B2300
Montréal, Quebec H2L 4J5
Tel: (514) 283-6607 - TDD: 283-8316
Fax: (514) 283-3689
|
|
55 St. Clair Avenue East
Suite 624
Toronto, Ontario M4T 1M2
Tel: (416) 952-9096
Fax: (416) 954-6343
|
|
Kensington Building
275 Portage Avenue
Suite 1810
Winnipeg, Manitoba R3B 2B3
Tel: (204) 983-6306 - TDD: 983-8274
Fax: (204) 983-6317
|
|
Cornwall Professional Building
2125 - 11th Avenue
Room 103
Regina, Saskatchewan S4P 3X3
Tel: (306) 780-3422
Fax: (306) 780-3319
|
|
Suite 520 - 10405 Jasper Avenue
Edmonton, Alberta T5J 3N4
Tel: (780) 495-3224
Fax: (780) 495-3214
|
|
530-580 Hornby Street
Vancouver, British Columbia V6C 3B6
Tel: (604) 666-2111 - TDD: 666-0778
Fax: (604) 666-8322
|
|
Secretary General
|
|
This document is available in alternative
format upon request and may also be examined at the following Internet site: http://www.crtc.gc.ca |