What is the main limitation related to non-consensual intercepts by a non-A-certified officer?

The choice indicating that non-A-certified officers must have a valid reason to listen is the correct one because it emphasizes the necessity of having a legitimate justification for any interception of communications. In many jurisdictions, laws governing wiretaps and electronic surveillance require that non-consensual intercepts are only carried out if there is probable cause or a significant justification for the action. This ensures that individuals' privacy rights are protected and that such powerful surveillance tools are not abused.

In this context, non-A-certified officers operate under stricter limitations compared to A-certified officers. They can't conduct intercepts merely on a whim or without a substantiated reason. This helps to uphold legal standards that protect personal privacy and maintain the integrity of law enforcement practices.

The other options present limitations or conditions that do not accurately reflect the core legal framework surrounding non-consensual intercepts by non-A-certified officers. For instance, while they may not execute intercepts without proper authorization, the specific requirement of having a valid reason stands out as a foundational legal obligation.