Watch as the Goliath Goliath of the Wiretap battle moves from the courtroom to the street

The battle over data privacy and civil liberties has taken a new turn after the Supreme Court ruled in the Guardian v Australian Privacy Commissioner’s (APC) case that the public interest was paramount.

The case concerned a woman’s access to a file she had saved as a result of an investigation by police and found to contain personal information about her.

It led to the closure of the Federal Police’s Data Retention program, which had been widely used by agencies to track and record people’s online activity.

The case was heard in the Federal Court on Monday, with the High Court hearing on Monday afternoon.

Key points:APC argued the privacy and liberty interests at stakeIn the High Street, the battle over access to public records was joined by an online protest over privacy and free speechThe case arose from a police investigation into a man who allegedly used the program to track his online activityThe case has sparked widespread criticism of Australia’s surveillance regimeThe APC argued in its case that Australian privacy and freedom of speech were at stake in its pursuit of a public interest in tracking the activities of Australians.

APC chief executive Mark Butler said the privacy issue had become a “cascade of new and new privacy and privacy rights” and the public had a right to access and scrutinise government records.

“It is clear that we need to protect the public’s right to privacy, to the right to be free from unwarranted intrusions into their privacy, and to the need to safeguard and enforce the integrity of public records,” he said.

“That requires us to think through our policies, and the implications of what it means for privacy in a digital age.”

APCC is arguing that the privacy interests at issue in the case were not the same as those the public has a right of access to.

In a submission to the court, APC said it was concerned about a lack of transparency around the programs used by police to access people’s data, and said it would not be appropriate for the public to know whether or not an agency had the right under the Privacy Act to use its powers to access the personal information of Australians on file.

“There is no privacy interest in the Australian public’s access or use of this public record to pursue a criminal investigation,” the submission read.

However, in the High Streets, where the APC’s case was being heard, protesters were gathering outside the building, with a number holding banners reading: “No More Surveillance, No More Privacy”.

“We are not here to get a piece of your data, we are here to stand up and say that we want our data back,” one of the protesters said, in reference to the public record program.

Another protester, who did not want to be named, said the protesters were protesting about the need for better data protection.

“The police have to go back to where they belong, they need to go home,” she said.

One of the most popular websites used to track people’s activities, the internet service provider iiNet, was also one of those that had recently been ordered to hand over a trove of data by a federal court judge in the trial.

But the AFP said iiNet was not in breach of the Privacy Principles and had been acting in good faith.

According to the AFP, the AFP had used the data in the course of its investigations, but it was not shared with any other agency, and there was no indication that any Australian data had been made available to third parties.

The AFP said it had been forced to close the data collection program because it had not been fully implemented.

An AFP spokesman said the agency was continuing to review its existing Privacy Principles, and that it was committed to the continued use of data, both to carry out investigations and for operational purposes.

He said the AFP was working with the Privacy Commissioner and other authorities to implement its Privacy Principles.

Topics:privacy-policy,law-crime-and-justice,police,courts-and-(prosecute)justice,government-and.gov.au,internet-technology,internet,internet service provider,australia