Annex to this Report. I think it would be prudent, however, for the public to be
assured as to the benefits of this highly intrusive investigative tool particularly in
light of the current debate about whether or not intercept product should be used
as evidence in a court of law. At present, I am firmly of the opinion that the
benefits of any change in the law are heavily outweighed by the disadvantages,
and with one exception, everyone to whom I have spoken in the course of my
visits seems to be of the same opinion.
Conclusion
62. The interception of communications is, as my predecessors have already
expressed in their Reports, an invaluable weapon for the purposes set out in
section 5(3) of RIPA. It is my view that during 2006 interception played a vital
part in the battle against terrorism and serious crime, and one that would have not
been achieved by other means. I am satisfied that the intelligence and law
enforcement agencies carry out this task diligently and in accordance with the
law.
63. I have not in this report referred to the Wilson Doctrine but I adopt without
qualification what was said about it by Sir Swinton Thomas last year. In times like
these it seems to me to be totally indefensible.
64. My work would be impossible without the generous support not only of the
Inspectors to whom I have referred but also of the small secretariat which works
with me, with the Intelligence Services Commissioner and the Investigatory
Powers Tribunal. I pay tribute to their excellent work.
65. Finally, it is clear from the first two paragraphs of this report that there is a
mismatch between the starting date of the term of my appointment as
Commissioner and the period to be covered by my first “annual” report. It seems
to me that during my period in office thought should be given to the best way of
resolving that anomaly.
12