Annex to Recs  Within the oversight regime there must be regular reporting to the public on whether the government is carrying out its surveillance activities appropriately, in a way that helps the public understand whether the government has followed the procedures.  Oversight will usually happen at a defined time after surveillance has taken place (often with a regular report to the Parliament or public) and is designed to test whether surveillance that has already happened took place in accordance with the framework the country has in place. 4. Notification of Individuals under Surveillance  It is understood that there will be times when individuals cannot be notified that they are under surveillance as to do this could jeopardise the surveillance itself.  However, notification of individuals if they have been the subject of surveillance is an important part of the framework in a country to give individuals who may have been subject to illegal surveillance access to remedy. At a minimum, users should be notified that their communications have been subject to surveillance when the surveillance is complete.  The legal framework should set out the circumstances under which there may be a delay in individuals being notified that they are under surveillance and the authorising body for this. 5. Remedy  Individuals need to know whether they have been the subject of surveillance in order to bring a complaint and obtain a remedy for surveillance that was carried out not in accordance with the law. When individuals are informed that they have been the subject of surveillance they should also be informed of the procedure for filing a complaint if they wish to do so,  Any alleged violation must be promptly, thoroughly and impartially investigated.  Where a violation is identified it must be possible to end it. For example, the body examining the potential abuse must be able to order the termination of the surveillance and the deletion of data and prohibition of its use by issuing binding orders. 6. Transparency  The legal framework concerning communications surveillance must be publicly accessible and set out the nature, scope and time-frame of possible surveillance, the requirements that must be met for surveillance to be authorised, and which authorities are responsible for authorisation, carrying out and supervising the surveillance. The process for remedy for individuals who have been the subject of inappropriate surveillance must be explained, as should the circumstances in which there can be sharing of information across borders between governments. There should be a clear explanation of each different type of surveillance that is possible. See below for some of the current issues that are being addressed in international and national debates relating to this.  The publicly accessible information about surveillance set out in the law must be sufficiently clear and precise for individuals to be able to understand it and foresee how the law might be applied to them.  To promote government accountability, the government should produce, as a minimum, the aggregate yearly figures on the specific number of requests for surveillance it has made, including the number accepted and rejected, details of the way in which it has been using its powers, and information broken down by specific legal authority for example, wiretaps, the number of requests to service providers, etc. 38 PAGE ANNEX TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS: LAWFUL INTERCEPTION AND GOVERNMENT ACCESS TO USER DATA