ACIC believes there's no legitimate reason to use an encrypted communication

Funny, that means its own intelligence and military are criminal enterprises. I guess they assume their diplomatic communications should be open to all too. Maybe using CB or ham radio to ensure open access?

I do sympathize with the problem of dealing with criminals and terrorists. But when adversaries are everywhere (note the many SIM-catching eavesdroppers around Washington DC, not in Australia to be sure but I bet it’s a problem in their capital too) everyone needs a private option.

I'm fine with ACIC having those three warrant options, since they're still under the watchful eyes of IGIS.

I don't believe AFP should be included directly in this, as we hear of bad apples within the AFP ranks unlawfully accessing various things and disseminating sensitive information often enough to suggest that they, collectively, can't be trusted.

If AFP could request info from ACIC or request ACIC execute warrants on AFPs behalf, I'd be fine with that too, since that sharing of info and warrant execution would still be subjected to IGIS scrutiny.

I don't agree with ACIC claim of law abiding citizens having no legitimate reason to use encrypted communication. ACIC is welcome to all of my communication data, encrypted or otherwise, but I absolutely don't want bad actors having access to it.

I believe the use of E2E is an legitimate application of our government's urging Australians to stay 'cybersafe'.

Is it true?: "ACIC believes there's no legitimate reason to use an encrypted communication platform" - I don't see it mentioned in a skim of the PDF. Maybe it was said rather than written down. It's a bold claim so they should back it up in the article.