header-logo header-logo

24 February 2021 / Chaman Salhan
Issue: 7922 / Categories: Opinion , Criminal , Technology , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

EncroChat: turning intelligence into evidence

40724
Chaman Salhan questions why the NCA was able to ride roughshod over decades of policy which says that intercept evidence is inadmissible

On 16 June 2020, the UK’s law enforcement agencies began to carry out arrests nationwide, following the infiltration of communications network and service provider EncroChat, under the codename of Operation Venetic. Fast-forward eight months and the statistics tell you the story: over 1,000 arrests, £55m in cash, firearms and two tonnes of drugs seized, and murders avoided (see 'Intercept evidence in criminal proceedings').

Two central issues arise from the National Crime Agency’s (NCA) decision to turn the intelligence gathered from EncroChat into evidence: first, whether the NCA will in due course be proven right in their decision that this material is admissible as evidence in a court of law. Second, and just as importantly, it is clear to all those who are involved with the administration of justice that the decision to allow EncroChat evidence to be used in criminal trials potentially bodes very badly

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll