IPCO Annual Report 2017
and audio listening device. The MOD relies on joint authorisations. Under the IPA 2016, the
intelligence agencies will be able to apply for joint authorisations for directed and intrusive
surveillance when the collection includes equipment interference.22
How IPCO oversees these powers
4.20
IPCO oversees all surveillance activity conducted by the law enforcement and intelligence
agencies, the MOD and other public authorities, in addition to the local authorities in
England, Wales and Scotland (see Chapter 1). We are concerned that there is a lack of
oversight in this regard for local authorities in Northern Ireland which means these powers
are exercised without any external scrutiny.
4.21
Most inspections are carried out at the public authority’s premises. The inspectors will
scrutinise the policies and procedures that have been utilised to ensure compliance. IPCO
considers any training and how the surveillance equipment is managed, and the inspectors
will review a sample of the authorisation paperwork. The inspectors speak with senior
managers, authorising officers and the operational teams. They look in detail at the
operations, what was planned and what happened in order to test why the surveillance was
required, whether it was appropriate, if it was successful, what intelligence was gained and
how it was handled.
4.22
Inspections can last between one and five days, depending on the extent and complexity
of how the various powers have been utilised. As reported in the previous chapter (CHIS),
in 2017 we conducted 59 surveillance and CHIS inspections at law enforcement agencies,
134 at local authorities23 and 21 at other public authorities (e.g. government regulators).
Surveillance authorisations were also considered in detail during our primary bi-annual
inspections at each intelligence agency during 2017 (led by Sir John Goldring).
4.23
Every local authority in England, Wales and Scotland is inspected once every three years,
or more frequently if their compliance record is poor or if there is some other good reason
for an interim visit. This is either at the premises of the authority or by way of a desktop
inspection, when an inspector will remotely review the authorisations and the materials
relevant to compliance. As already highlighted, many local authorities are using their directed
surveillance powers less frequently than a decade ago; as a result, remote inspections will be
utilised to a greater extent than hitherto, particularly for those authorities that have not used
these powers since the last inspection.
4.24
However, there will always be an inspection, by either method, of each local authority –
irrespective of whether or how often they use their powers – to confirm (amongst other
things) that they are not carrying out surveillance inadvertently. In 2017 we also undertook
desktop inspections of Fire and Rescue authorities who have effectively ceased to use their
powers. It is for the government to review whether access to these powers is still required.
Findings
4.25
Following our inspection of a range of warrants and authorisations, we are confident
that intrusive surveillance is being conducted satisfactorily. The following discrete points,
however, are worthy of mention.
22 Full details of which warrants and authorisations may be combined, and the wider range of public authorities for which this
is permissible is contained in Schedule 8 of the Investigatory Powers Act 2016.
23 Including 46 ‘desktop inspections’.
27