Phone SeizedAustraliaQueensland device information orders under the PPRA
Queensland device information orders under the PPRA
What you must do, what you can refuse, and what they can do
Every claim below links to the source it comes from, with the wording quoted so you can check it yourself.
You must
Refusing is a criminal offence.
A person who, without reasonable excuse, contravenes an order made under PPRA s.154(1) or (2), s.154A(2) or s.178A(1) commits a crime under s.205A of the Criminal Code, carrying a maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment.
Criminal Code (Qld), s.205A(1) — contravening a device information order, offence and penalty (current as at 1 June 2026)
“A person who, without reasonable excuse, contravenes—an order made under the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000, section 154(1) or (2), 154A(2) or 178A(1); or—an order made under the Crime and Corruption Act 2001, section 88A(1) or (2) or 88B(2);—commits a crime.—Maximum penalty—5 years imprisonment.”
Read it at legislation.qld.gov.auquote checked 2026-10-02
Section 205A(2) of the Criminal Code (Qld) says it is not a reasonable excuse to contravene the order on the basis that complying with the order might tend to incriminate the person or expose the person to a penalty.
Criminal Code (Qld), s.205A(1)–(2) — the offence, and self-incrimination as no reasonable excuse (current as at 1 June 2026)
“A person who, without reasonable excuse, contravenes—an order made under the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000, section 154(1) or (2), 154A(2) or 178A(1); or—an order made under the Crime and Corruption Act 2001, section 88A(1) or (2) or 88B(2);—commits a crime.—It is not a reasonable excuse to contravene the order on the basis that complying with the order might tend to incriminate the person or expose the person to a penalty.”
Read it at legislation.qld.gov.auquote checked 2026-10-02
What they can do
A power the law gives them over you or your device.
If the issuer is a magistrate or a judge, the issuer may, in a search warrant, order a specified person, in relation to a digital device at the place, to give a police officer access information for the device or any assistance necessary for the officer to gain access to device information from the device.
Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld), s.154(1)(b) — order to give a police officer access information (current as at 1 July 2026)
“If the issuer is a magistrate or a judge, the issuer may, in a search warrant, order a specified person to do any of the following in relation to a digital device at the place—give a police officer access information for the device or any assistance necessary for the officer to gain access to device information from the device”
Read it at legislation.qld.gov.auquote checked 2026-10-04
If the issuer is a magistrate or a judge, the issuer may, in a search warrant, order a specified person, in relation to a digital device at the place, to allow a police officer to use access information for the device to gain access to device information from the device.
Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld), s.154(1)(c)(i) — order to allow a police officer to use access information (current as at 1 July 2026)
“If the issuer is a magistrate or a judge, the issuer may, in a search warrant, order a specified person to do any of the following in relation to a digital device at the place—allow a police officer to—use access information for the device to gain access to device information from the device”
Read it at legislation.qld.gov.auquote checked 2026-10-04
If the issuer of a search warrant is a magistrate or a judge, the issuer may also, in the search warrant, order that a specified person is required to do a thing mentioned in s.154(1)(b) or (c) in relation to a digital device seized and removed from the place, after the device has been removed.
This order is made in the search warrant itself.
Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld), s.154(2) — order extending to a device after removal (current as at 1 July 2026)
“If the issuer is a magistrate or a judge, the issuer may also, in the search warrant, order that a specified person is required to do a thing mentioned in subsection — (1)(b) or (c) in relation to a digital device seized and removed from the place, after the device has been removed.”
Read it at legislation.qld.gov.auquote checked 2026-10-02
On the application of a police officer, a magistrate or a judge may make an order requiring a specified person to do a thing mentioned in s.154(1)(b) or (c).
This is a distinct order power from the one a magistrate or judge can include in the search warrant.
Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld), s.154A(2) — post-seizure order (current as at 1 July 2026)
“On the application of a police officer, a magistrate or a judge may make an order requiring a specified person to do a thing mentioned in section 154(1)(b) or (c).”
Read it at legislation.qld.gov.auquote checked 2026-09-08
Limits on them
A rule that constrains them, or a remedy you can use.
A separate order under s.154A(2) is made on the application of a police officer.
Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld), s.154A(2) — post-seizure order (current as at 1 July 2026)
“On the application of a police officer, a magistrate or a judge may make an order requiring a specified person to do a thing mentioned in section 154(1)(b) or (c).”
Read it at legislation.qld.gov.auquote checked 2026-09-08
Section 154A applies if a digital device is seized under a search warrant and removed from a place, and either the search warrant did not contain an order made under section 154(1) or (2), or the search warrant contained an order made under section 154(1) or (2) but further access information is required for a police officer to gain access to device information from the device that may be relevant evidence; or a digital device is otherwise lawfully seized under this Act, other than under section 176(1)(j), and removed from a place.
Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld), s.154A(1) — when the post-seizure order section applies (current as at 1 July 2026)
“This section applies if—a digital device is seized under a search warrant and removed from a place, and either—the search warrant did not contain an order made under section 154(1) or (2); or—the search warrant contained an order made under section 154(1) or (2) but further access information is required for a police officer to gain access to device information from the device that may be relevant evidence; or—a digital device is otherwise lawfully seized under this Act, other than under section 176(1)(j), and removed from a place.”
Read it at legislation.qld.gov.auquote checked 2026-10-02
A magistrate or a judge (the judicial officer) may make an order under s.154A(2) only if, for a digital device seized under a search warrant issued by a magistrate or judge, the judicial officer is satisfied there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that device information from the digital device may be relevant evidence; or, otherwise, the judicial officer is satisfied there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that device information from the digital device may be evidence of a crime scene threshold offence, or of an offence against section 223, 227A or 227B of the Criminal Code.
Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld), s.154A(5) — when a judicial officer may make a post-seizure order (current as at 1 July 2026)
“A magistrate or a judge (the judicial officer) may make an order under subsection (2) only if—for a digital device seized under a search warrant issued by a magistrate or judge—the judicial officer is satisfied there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that device information from the digital device may be relevant evidence; or—otherwise—the judicial officer is satisfied there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that device information from the digital device may be evidence of—a crime scene threshold offence; or—an offence against any of the following sections of the Criminal Code—section 223—section 227A—section 227B.”
Read it at legislation.qld.gov.auquote checked 2026-10-04
The Criminal Code offence of contravening a device information order applies to a contravention that is without reasonable excuse, but s.205A(2) says it is not a reasonable excuse to contravene the order on the basis that complying with the order might tend to incriminate the person or expose the person to a penalty.
Criminal Code (Qld), s.205A(1)–(2) — the offence, and self-incrimination as no reasonable excuse (current as at 1 June 2026)
“A person who, without reasonable excuse, contravenes—an order made under the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000, section 154(1) or (2), 154A(2) or 178A(1); or—an order made under the Crime and Corruption Act 2001, section 88A(1) or (2) or 88B(2);—commits a crime.—It is not a reasonable excuse to contravene the order on the basis that complying with the order might tend to incriminate the person or expose the person to a penalty.”
Read it at legislation.qld.gov.auquote checked 2026-10-02
Queensland law
This page covers Queensland law — the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (PPRA) and the Criminal Code. The Commonwealth’s s.3LA order is a separate provision, covered on its own page.
What an order can require
If the issuer is a magistrate or a judge, the issuer may, in a search warrant, order a specified person, in relation to a digital device at the place, to give a police officer access information for the device or any assistance necessary for the officer to gain access to device information from the device (s.154(1)(b)). On the same condition, the issuer may order a specified person, in relation to a digital device at the place, to allow a police officer to use access information for the device to gain access to device information from the device (s.154(1)(c)(i)).
If the issuer of a search warrant is a magistrate or a judge, the issuer may also, in the search warrant, order that a specified person is required to do a thing mentioned in s.154(1)(b) or (c) in relation to a digital device seized and removed from the place, after the device has been removed.
Separately, where s.154A applies, a magistrate or judge may, on a police officer’s application, make an order requiring a specified person to do a thing mentioned in s.154(1)(b) or (c) — a distinct order power from the one that can be included in the search warrant. The condition in s.154A(5) on making that order is set out under “How the separate order is made” below.
The offence for contravening an order
A person who, without reasonable excuse, contravenes an order made under PPRA s.154(1) or (2), s.154A(2) or s.178A(1) commits a crime under s.205A of the Criminal Code, carrying a maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment. Section 205A(1) also covers an order made under the Crime and Corruption Act 2001, section 88A(1) or (2) or 88B(2).
The offence in s.205A is worded “without reasonable excuse” — the Code builds the qualification directly into it. Section 205A(2) of the Criminal Code (Qld) says it is not a reasonable excuse to contravene the order on the basis that complying with the order might tend to incriminate the person or expose the person to a penalty.
How the separate order is made
Section 154A(1) says the section applies if a digital device is seized under a search warrant and removed from a place, and either the search warrant did not contain an order made under section 154(1) or (2), or the search warrant contained an order made under section 154(1) or (2) but further access information is required for a police officer to gain access to device information from the device that may be relevant evidence; or a digital device is otherwise lawfully seized under this Act, other than under section 176(1)(j), and removed from a place.
The separate order under s.154A(2) is one that a magistrate or a judge may make on the application of a police officer.
Section 154A(5) says that a magistrate or a judge (the judicial officer) may make an order under subsection (2) only if, for a digital device seized under a search warrant issued by a magistrate or judge, the judicial officer is satisfied there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that device information from the digital device may be relevant evidence; or, otherwise, the judicial officer is satisfied there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that device information from the digital device may be evidence of a crime scene threshold offence, or of an offence against section 223, 227A or 227B of the Criminal Code.
See how this compares with the Commonwealth’s s.3LA order, New South Wales’ digital evidence access orders, Victoria’s s.465AA orders, and when you must give police the code generally.
Last reviewed . Next review due . No lawyer has reviewed this page — see [email protected] if you think something here is wrong.