header-logo header-logo

12 June 2015
Issue: 7657 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Overhaul of spy laws recommended by Independent Reviewer

The security agencies would need to consult a judge before intercepting communications, under an overhaul of spy laws suggested by the Independent Reviewer of Counter-Terrorism Legislation, David Anderson QC.

His influential report, A question of trust, which was laid before Parliament this week, calls for reform of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000—or RIPA 2000—the UK’s core law on surveillance. 

Anderson warns that “RIPA 2000, obscure since its inception, has been patched up so many times as to make it incomprehensible to all but a tiny band of initiates…This state of affairs is undemocratic, unnecessary and—in the long run intolerable.” 

He supports bulk collection of data by security agencies but warns that the courts should be able to decide whether its use is proportionate. He also suggests a new requirement of judicial authorisation of all warrants for interception, the role of the secretary of state being limited to certifying that certain warrants are required in the interests of national security.

Anderson said: “Trust requires verification. 

“Each intrusive power must be shown to be necessary, clearly spelled out in law, limited in accordance with international human rights standards and subject to demanding and visible safeguards. The current law is fragmented, obscure, under constant challenge and variable in the protections that it affords the innocent. It is time for a clean slate.” 

Commenting on David’s report this week, Andrea Coomber, director, Justice, says: “The Home Secretary wanted an independent view on the surveillance debate and the Independent Reviewer has spoken: no new powers now; new safeguards for powers there already; and independent judicial oversight.      

“We need a new law fit for the digital age, one that protects us all from disproportionately intrusive surveillance and provides appropriate judicial oversight.  David Anderson agrees: it should look nothing like the last government’s ‘Snoopers’ Charter’.”

 

Issue: 7657 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

HFW—Simon Petch

HFW—Simon Petch

Global shipping practice expands with experienced ship finance partner hire

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Infrastructure specialist joins as partner in Glasgow office

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll