This issue goes far beyond how specifications are numbered and simply renumbering specification sections won't solve the problem.
It's really up to the general contractor to decide who does the work of each specification section, as he assumes legal responsibility for the final outcome of the project. Most owners and architects give the general contractor wide latitude in choosing how he wishes to divide up the work and who he chooses to issue subcontracts to. The thinking is, the more specifically you tell the contactor how to do his job, the less ability you have to hold him responsible for the outcome.
I have lost many a battle with architects and owners trying to control who does the security/surveillance work on a project. In some cases, with the owner's backing, I have been successful, but in many more cases, the general contractor pretty much does as he pleases once he is awarded the contract. I have been fighting this problem for 29 years now and still don't have the answer.
Novice specification writers think that they can insert a laundry list of requirements into a specification ("must be specialty contractor in business for at least 10 years", "must have done at least 15 jobs of a similar type","must be factory certified by ABC and XYZ", must maintain local spare parts inventory", etc.), but in most cases these clauses are unenforceable and will simply be ignored by the general contractor.
Most general contractors prefer to deal with as few subcontractors on a project as possible, and for this reason alone, prefer to give the security/surveillance and other low voltage work to the electrical contractor rather than hiring 3 or 4 additional specialty subcontractors.