NO WARRANTS NEEDED FOR POWER BILLS

Chalk up another victory in the war against drugs.

Last week our highest court ruled the use of electricity-consumption
data from a Calgary power supplier obtained without a search warrant
did not constitute a violation of the Charter privacy right to be
free from unreasonable searches.

The immediate result of this ruling is the conviction of Daniel James
Gomboc of Calgary on charges of producing marijuana and possession of
marijuana for the purpose of trafficking.

Police suspected a grow-op in Gomboc's home after receiving an
anonymous tip, speaking with neighbours, and conducting surveillance
of the house. Thinking they didn't have enough evidence to obtain a
search warrant, police sought information from the local electricity
supplier, Enmax. They received information showing cyclical patterns
of electricity use indicative of a grow-op of some sort.

Armed with this information, police sought and obtained a search
warrant permitting the search of Gomboc's home -- which in turn led
to the seizure of 165 kg of bulk marijuana and 206 grams of processed
marijuana.

The question for the Supreme Court of Canada was simple: Should
police have obtained prior judicial authorization allowing it to
obtain data on Gomboc's energy consumption. The answer to this
question turns on whether there is a reasonable expectation of
privacy in relation to the consumption data. The Supremes ruled 7-2
there was no reasonable expectation of privacy, but they came to this
conclusion in an odd fashion.

Four judges ruled there could be no reasonable expectation of
privacy, as the consumption data does not reveal any "intimate
details of the lifestyle and personal choices" of any occupant and
Gomboc didn't tell Enmax he wanted his consumption data kept private.

Three judges based their ruling solely on the fact that Gomboc could
have, but did not, advise Enmax he did not wish to have his
consumption data released to the police.

The remaining two judges dissented on the basis the consumption data
was capable of predicting or revealing personal information thereby
resulting in a reasonable expectation of privacy.

So, while Gomboc has taken one for the team, so to speak, his
conviction has provided others with a valuable piece of information:
Contact your electricity provider, and indeed any third party who
provides services to your home, and specifically request they do not
provide any information to anybody concerning your account or your
consumption of services.

Had Gomboc done this, he'd have had the two dissenting judges in his
corner plus the three other judges who based their decision on the
lack of this request. He'd have had a five-to-four majority ruling
the provision of the information by Enmax was wrongful because police
ought to have obtained prior judicial authority.

But sending your utility provider a written request not to disclose
might not always work. Alberta law provides electricity customers
with the right to request their customer information not be provided
to police. Laws may change, they vary in other provinces and a
customer's request won't prevent police from seeking a search warrant.

Our marijuana laws don't make much sense. We spend far too much money
enforcing silly marijuana laws. Having said that, marijuana grow-ops
hidden in homes in residential areas are illegal, can present a
danger and should be closed down.

Allowing the police to easily access electricity records so as to
better deal with this problem makes sense to me -- whether or not you
don't want your electricity provider to give information to the
police without a warrant.

What I really worry about is who has access to smart meter data and
what personal information can be gleaned from that data.