ability of communications surveillance, the existing legal framework which currently distinguishes between 'content' and 'non-content' is no longer appropriate, and protection from all types of surveillance should be given a higher legal priority. The Principles Legality Any limitation imposed on an International Human Rights must be prescribed by law. Sufficient notice should be given if a proposed law is going to limit one of these rights. The law should be clear, and given periodic review to ensure it remains effective given the speed of technological development. Legitimate Aim Communications surveillance should only be used by permitted state authorities where necessary in a democratic society. Any situation where discrimination arises should not be used. Necessity Surveillance laws should be limited to those which are necessary to achieve a legitimate aim, or where there are multiple means but Communications Surveillance is the least intrusive method on International Human Rights. The onus of establishing necessity should remain with the state Adequacy Any communications surveillance authorized by law must be appropriate for the legitimate aim it is fulfilling. Proportionality Communications Surveillance is regarded as a highly intrusive act, and therefore must consider the sensitivity and severity of the situation. The state should establish the following prior to conducting communications surveillance: There is a high chance of serious crime or specific threat There is a high degree of probability that relevant evidence will be obtained. Other less invasive techniques have been exhausted, such that communications surveillance is the least intrusive method Information collected will be confined to only which is relevant Excess information obtained will be returned or destroyed The information accesses will be used by the specific authority for the purpose the authority was given The requested authority to use communications surveillance does not undermine the purpose of the right to privacy or other fundamental freedoms. Competent Judicial Authority The authority determining the validity of the communications surveillance must be independent of those conducting the surveillance, and be competent when making these decisions. Due Process That everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by a competent judicial authority. Due process can be used interchangeably with "procedural fairness" and "natural justice" User Notification Those subjects of Communication Surveillance should be given the opportunity to challenge the decision when a decision authorizing Surveillance has been issued. The materials presented in support of the application should be available for those subjects.