Section 312CD — Crimes Act 1961: Matters of which Judge must be satisfied in respect of applications relating to terrorist offences

312CD Matters of which Judge must be satisfied in respect of applications relating to terrorist offences (1) A Judge may grant an interception warrant on an application under section 312CC if satisfied that it is in the best interests of the administration of justice to do so, and— (a) that there are reasonable grounds for believing,— (i) that a terrorist offence has been committed, or is being committed, or is about to be committed; and (ii) if the offence has yet to be committed, that the use of an interception device to intercept private communications is likely to prevent its commission; and (b) that there are reasonable grounds for believing— (i) that evidence relevant to the investigation of the case will be obtained through the use of an interception device to intercept private communications; or (ii) if the offence has yet to be committed, that evidence relevant to the prevention of the offence will be obtained through the use of an interception device to intercept private communications; and (c) whichever of the following is applicable: (i) that investigative procedures and techniques other than the interception of private communications have been tried, but have failed to enable the police to conclude their investigation of the case successfully or (as the case may be) failed to help prevent the commission of the offence; and (ii) that investigative procedures and techniques other than the interception of private communications— (A) are unlikely to enable the police to conclude their investigation of the case successfully or (as the case may be) to help prevent the commission of the offence, or (B) are likely to be too dangerous to adopt in the particular case: (iii) that the case is so urgent that it would be impracticable for the police to carry out their investigation using only investigative procedures and techniques other than the interception of private communications; and (d) that the private communications proposed to be intercepted are not likely to be privileged in proceedings in a court of law by virtue of Part 3 of the Evidence Amendment Act (No 2) 1980 or of any rule of law that confers privilege on communications of a professional character between a barrister or solicitor and a client. (2) In determining whether or not the granting of an interception warrant under subsection (1) is in the best interests of the administration of justice, the Judge must consider the extent to which the privacy of any person or persons would be likely to be interfered with by the interception of private communications under it. (3) Subsection (2) does not limit subsection (1) . Sections 312CC and 312CD were inserted, as from 31 October 2003, by section 8 Crimes Amendment Act (No 2) 2003 (2003 No 105).