Standard 2.12 Non-Consensual Electronic Surveillance

Last month we considered the laws around consensual electronic surveillance in Standard 2.11 and want to take a look at the details involved in Standard 2.12, which is the standard on the non- consensual use of electronic surveillance as made available from the American Bar Association.

What is “non-consensual electronic surveillance?”

According to Standard 2.12 (a),“non-consensual electronic surveillance” is the court-ordered interception of communications, actions, or events.

Are there specific measures prosecution should weigh before obtaining a court order for non-consensual electronic surveillance?

Yes. According to Standard 2.12 (b), “in deciding whether to request a court order for non-consensual electronic surveillance, the prosecutor should consider the potential benefit of obtaining direct, incriminating, and credible evidence that can be used alone or to corroborate other information.

And according to (c), “In deciding whether to request a court order for non-consensual electronic surveillance, the prosecutor should consider the potential costs and risks, including:

  • whether the suspected criminal activity being investigated is sufficiently serious and persistent to justify:
    • the significant intrusion on the privacy interests of targets and innocent third parties;
    • the need to obtain periodic reauthorization for electronic surveillance; and
    • the financial and resource costs associated with such surveillance.
  • whether all requirements of the law are met.

To learn more or to read Standard 2.12 in full, click Standard 2.12 Non-Consensual Electronic Surveilliance.

iRecord is a leader in the industry of electronic recording systems. Contact us to learn more about our systems, to request a product demo or to register for our next webinar!

Contact Us

Name(Required)