The CJC recommends that Supreme Court judges continue to be solely responsible for hearing and determining listening device applications and that an officer of the Queensland Police Service of the rank of inspector or above be authorized to apply for a warrant to install a listening device. The CJS also recommends that warrants for listening devices be available only for offenses under the Drugs Misuse Act that are punishable by 20 years or more imprisonment; indictable offenses punishable by 7 years or more imprisonment that involve serious personal injury or loss of life, serious property damage, fraud, and official corruption; and indictable offenses punishable by 7 years or more imprisonment that involve two or more offenders, substantial planning and organization, and sophisticated methods and techniques. The CJS believes that a judge must weigh the following factors before ordering the issuance of a warrant: offense gravity, privacy and safety of the individual(s) affected, and likelihood of obtaining evidence. Further, the CJS recommends that a judge have the power to authorize installing, servicing, relocating, and/or retrieving a listening device. Other CJS recommendations focus on the use of reasonable force, entry by subterfuge, the use of listening devices without prior judicial approval, emergency warrants, warrant content and extensions, the protection of legal professional privilege, the installation of visual surveillance devices on private property, vehicle tracking devices, and electronic surveillance recordkeeping and reporting requirements. Additional CJS recommendations concern body searches and examinations, fingerprinting techniques and records, suspect identification by eyewitnesses, crime scene preservation, and the exclusion of unlawfully or improperly obtained evidence. Appendixes provide supplemental information on electronic surveillance laws in Australia and police powers to take human fingerprints and photographs. Footnotes and tables