BIG BROTHER WATCH AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM JUDGMENT
as a result of conduct covered by that Act. It had jurisdiction to investigate
any complaint that a person’s communications had been intercepted and,
where interception had occurred, to examine the authority for such
interception.
123. Appointments to the IPT were essentially judicial in nature but
varied depending on whether the proposed candidate was a serving member
of the senior judiciary of England and Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland
(referred to as a “judicial member”) or if they were a “non-judicial
member”. A non-judicial member could be a former member of the
judiciary who was no longer serving or a senior member of the legal
profession of at least ten years’ standing who was not a full-time judge.
Where judicial members were selected from the judiciary in England and
Wales, the Judicial Office, on behalf of the Lord Chief Justice, managed the
selection process. The Judicial Office invited expressions of interest from
serving High Court Judges in England and Wales and applicants were
interviewed by a panel, which consisted of the President of the IPT, a
non-judicial member of the IPT and a lay Commissioner from the Judicial
Appointments Commission. The panel then reported to the Lord Chief
Justice who wrote to the Home Secretary making formal recommendations
for appointments. The Home Secretary then wrote to the Prime Minister
asking him to seek permission for Letters Patent from Her Majesty the
Queen for the recommended appointment(s). The Prime Minister
recommended the chosen candidate(s) to Her Majesty the Queen who
formalised the appointment through Letters Patent. Non judicial-members
were recruited through open competition. The IPT placed advertisements for
non-judicial members in a selection of national newspapers and recruitment
sites asking for expressions of interest from suitably qualified individuals.
The process differed from that of judicial members in that it did not involve
the Lord Chief Justice, but was the same in all other respects. There are
currently five judicial members (two members of the English Court of
Appeal (one of whom is the President), one member of the English High
Court and two members of the Outer House of the Court of Session in
Scotland (one of whom is the Vice-President)) and five non-judicial
members (of whom one is a retired High Court judge from Northern
Ireland).
124. According to sections 67(2) and 67(3)(c), the IPT was to apply the
principles applicable by a court on an application for judicial review. It did
not, however, have power to make a Declaration of Incompatibility if it
found primary legislation to be incompatible with the European Convention
on Human Rights as it was not a “court” for the purposes of section 4 of the
Human Rights Act 1998.
125. Section 68(6) and (7) required those involved in the authorisation
and execution of an interception warrant to disclose or provide to the IPT all
documents and information it required.
44