20
MALONE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM JUGDMENT
interception, both the Birkett report and the White Paper gave figures for the
number of warrants granted annually over the years preceding their
publication. The figures in the White Paper (Appendix III) indicate that in
England and Wales between 1969 and 1979 generally something over 400
telephone warrants and something under 100 postal warrants were granted
annually by the Home Secretary. Paragraph 27 of the White Paper also gave
the total number of Home Secretary warrants in force on 31 December for
the years 1958 (237), 1968 (273) and 1978 (308). The number of telephones
installed at the end of 1979 was, according to the Government, 26,428,000,
as compared with 7,327,000 at the end of 1957. The Government further
stated that over the period from 1958 to 1978 there was a fourfold increase
in indictable crime, from 626,000 to 2,395,000.
54. When the White Paper was published on 1 April 1980, the Home
Secretary announced in Parliament that the Government, whilst not
proposing to introduce legislation (see paragraph 37 above), intended to
appoint a senior member of the judiciary to conduct a continuous
independent check so as to ensure that interception of communications was
being carried out for the established purposes and in accordance with the
established procedures. His terms of reference were stated to be:
"to review on a continuing basis the purposes, procedures, conditions and
safeguards governing the interception of communications on behalf of the police, HM
Customs and Excise and the security service as set out in [the White Paper]; and to
report to the Prime Minister" (Hansard, House of Commons, 1 April 1980, cols. 207208).
It was further announced that the person appointed would have the right
of access to all relevant papers and the right to request additional
information from the departments and organisations concerned. For the
purposes of his first report, which would be published, he would examine
all the arrangements set out in the White Paper; his subsequent reports on
the detailed operation of the arrangements would not be published, but
Parliament would be informed of any findings of a general nature and of
any changes that were made in the arrangements (ibid.).
55. Lord Diplock, a Lord of Appeal in Ordinary since 1968, was
appointed to carry out the review. In his first report, published in March
1981, Lord Diplock recorded, inter alia, that, on the basis of a detailed
examination of apparently typical cases selected at random, he was satisfied
(i)
that, in each case, the information provided by the applicant
authorities to the Secretary of State in support of the issue of a warrant was
stated with accuracy and candour and that the procedures followed within
the applicant authorities for vetting applications before submission to the
Secretary of State were appropriate to detect and correct any departure from
proper standards;