Sad day for those hoping the courts will provide a bulwark for protection against police abuse, or an acknowledgement of realities.Original Post Deleted
@eIIe did the right thing quoting the gist of the article here, albeit in the slightly wrong thread.
The police brought a challenge over a lower court's ruling in October 2017 that officers can only search an arrestee's mobile in "exigent circumstances".
Such emergency situations were taken to mean, for example, when there was a need to prevent an imminent threat to the public or police, to prevent the imminent loss or destruction of evidence, or to look for evidence in "extremely urgent and vulnerable" situations.
But in a judgement published on Thursday afternoon, three judges sided with the police that a warrant should not be required to search phones in all other situations.
The judgement says that in circumstances when it is not "reasonably practicable" to obtain a warrant, officers can search the contents of a suspect's mobile phone if they have "a reasonable basis for having to conduct the search immediately", either to investigate an offence the suspect is believed to be involved with, or for obtaining and preserving information or evidence connected to such offences; or for the safety of others.
Since the 'police' have already been committing criminal acts against the population with total impunity it looks like these kangaroo judges are simply codifying that impunity in 'law'.
Looking forward to the next ruling soon entitling the regime paramilitaries to use any form of torture they may find convenient in order to 'secure compliance' whenever and for whatever reason.
Meanwhile, everyone get a WIFI/BT-only tablet (full encryption naturally) for all the traditional smartphone stuff and a separate Nokia "feature phone" to act as a data link.
"Here's my Nokia phone, Sir Officer Sir, but I don't have to unlock my diary-tablet to just anyone in the street without a court order..."