The revealing phone recordings - so, who did it?

“You can skip any lecture during this course but it is recommended that you attend the one on “Covert and overt surveillance,” said the co-ordinator when we lined up to register for a course in investigative journalism at the City University in London in the summer of 2007.

So, there were high expectations when two men turned up at the lecture theatre. For one hour, they held our attention showing the tricks of the trade. And out came water bottles, sun shades, electronic sockets and even a can of cola where recording devices were hidden.

We were told that these gadgets were available in several electronic shops in central London but were warned: “It is not an offence to be in possession but if you use them, then you could get into trouble. As journalists, use them selectively and be discreet because you could be prosecuted if you are caught.”

Fast forward to 2011 and the phone-hacking scandal broke. Police investigations revealed that some British tabloids, especially the News of the World had tapped and recorded telephone calls.

More than 4,000 people had been identified by police as possible victims of phone hacking by the newspaper. The alleged targets have included politicians, celebrities, actors, sportspeople, relatives of dead UK soldiers and people who were caught up in the 7/7 London bombings.

The government sent up an inquiry headed by Lord Justice Leveson and for a good year, I followed the inquiry (which was telecast live) while I was working in London, with special interest. A friend, heart surgeon Dr Hasnat Khan who was romantically linked to the late Princess Diana, was one of the victims. He sued the newspaper and subsequently accepted an undisclosed sum of money as an out of court settlement – all of which the good doctor donated to charity.

Three journalists, including the newspaper’s editor, were sentenced to jail for their role in the phone hacking.

Over the past few days, statements have been made by various individuals and groups that the series of telephone recordings released by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) questioned the legality of the tapping and its release.

Scores of people and organisations have given their views but some have suggested or insinuated that it was a state-sponsored operation.

We have to remind ourselves that when Najib Abdul Razak’s close friend Abdul Razak Baginda was arrested in connection with the murder of Altantuya Shaariibuu, Najib’s exchange of messages with lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah was in public domain and is still in circulation.

At that time, no one made a hue and cry and no one questioned how privileged information between the then deputy minister and his lawyer became public.

As chief commissioner Latheefa Koya (above)  pointed out, the MACC received the recordings in the New Year. This means someone else did it and passed it on. Surely, state agencies don’t go around recording conversations between a husband and wife and if it had done so, why wait till now?

Those individuals whose voices are heard in the recordings have neither denied nor confirmed speaking on the phone. The MACC says the recordings have been authenticated and hence the issue of splicing or editing the recordings do not arise.

Joe Public is left to interpret what “on the way to Mexico” means and decipher certain phrases and cryptic clues in these conversations.

Then again, is there not something called a “secure line” when leaders of governments call one another on official business? Or was the call to help with the loan agreement considered non-official?

Taking the stand that the state was not involved, it becomes a case of whodunnit? Some may want to suggest agencies of foreign powers whose operatives have the ability and capability to undertake such operations. Well, it is a probability but the conspiracy theorists will continue with their speculation.

Privacy is a myth in this digital age and time. It must be accepted that listening devices and other paraphernalia for phone hacking and recording are now readily available.

Browse the internet and for the right price, such devices will be delivered to your doorstep. More and more of the devices are readily available on online marketplaces like Amazon and eBay.

A quick Google search last night revealed that there are hundreds of listings for “listening devices” and at least one online store in Malaysia is selling them.

The proliferation of such devices will continue because there is no legislation to make possessing them illegal. Besides, all one needs is a smartphone and he or she is in business.

Jack Lazzereschi, the technical director of bug sweeping company Shapestones, was quoted by UK’s Metro as saying: “Users have just to insert a SIM card into a hidden slot and call a number to listen in on their unwitting targets.

“People using hidden cameras can watch what’s happening using an App on their phones. The devices are so effective, cheap and hard to trace to their users. Even law enforcement agencies prefer using them over expensive old-school devices.”

So, it should not come as a surprise if more such taped conversations emerge. Why stop at nine when someone had the gall, the gumption and the devices to target even the then prime minister?

Do we anticipate with glee for the revelations or fret that privacy is no longer sacrosanct? - Mkini