Canada's biggest police association says a Supreme Court ruling on who should pay the cost of digital surveillance should clear the way for the federal government to reintroduce legislation that would help authorities monitor Internet and wireless communications.

The top court last week dismissed an appeal by Telus Mobility, which wanted to be compensated for digging up call records as part of 2004 criminal investigations in Ontario.

The court ruled Telus failed to prove it was forced to take "unreasonable" steps to comply with an order to hand over data.

The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, which represents senior officers at the municipal, provincial and federal levels, believes the ruling has removed one of the biggest roadblocks to the reintroduction of "lawful-access legislation."

The association has been lobbying for such a law since the late 1990s.

"In the digital age, we need appropriate tools to deal with Internet crime, cyber-stalking, child pornography, organized crime, national security investigations. We're one of the last G8 or G9 nations to do this. The time is well past for us to move on this," said Clayton Pecknold, co-chairman of the association's law amendments committee. He is also a deputy chief with the Central Saanich Police Service in British Columbia.

Deputy Chief Pecknold reiterated the police community's view that the lack of such legislation is hurting the ability of law enforcement agencies to track down cybercriminals.

The former Liberal government introduced a law in 2005, called the modernization of investigative techniques act, that would have compelled tele-communications service providers such as Bell and Rogers to disclose personal subscriber information to authorities upon request. The Tory government has been working on a new version of the law.

Police and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service can already seek the authority to wiretap private communications through the Criminal Code, CSIS Act and other laws. But the laws were written before the emergence of the Internet, mobile phones and handheld computers, and in many cases the industry hasn't developed the technology to intercept such communications.

The "lawful-access" law would have effectively forced companies to build intercept capabilities into their networks.

"This is an important and overdue piece of legislation. We're dealing with intercept legislation that has been around since the '70s, and every Canadian knows how technology has changed since then," said Deputy Chief Peck-nold.

But the telecommunications industry has told the government it won't support the law in its current form, according to documents obtained under the Access to Information Act.

"The associations are very concerned by the fact that (the lawful-access legislation) is entirely silent on the question of compensation for operational costs, notwithstanding that the topic is currently a significant point of dispute between certain (law enforcement agencies) and (telecom service providers)," says a joint submission to the government by the Information Technology Association of Canada, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, the Canadian Association of Internet Providers and the Canadian Wireless Tele-communications Association.

The industry groups have proposed amending the law to "provide reasonable compensation" to service providers for intercepting private communications on behalf of law enforcement and handing over subscriber information. Compensation has been a longstanding point of contention.

Some municipal police forces have refused to pay claims for compensation submitted by telecom providers.

But Deputy Chief Pecknold says the court ruling clarifies that any right to compensation must be spelled out in the law. "It reiterates the principle that every citizen, corporate or otherwise, has a responsibility to co-operate with the state in matters of public safety."

© The Ottawa Citizen 2008