Codes of Practice
21. Section 71(2)(a) of RIPA requires the Secretary of State to issue one or
more Codes of Practice relating to the exercise and performance of duties in
relation to Parts I to III of the Act. The Interception of Communications Code
of Practice, on which the Home Secretary obtained my views, was published
during 2002.
22. During the course of the year I was also asked by, and I duly provided, the
Home Office with my views on the draft Code of Practice relating to Part III of
RIPA — encryption keys.
Communications data
23. Chapter II of Part I of RIPA applies to the acquisition and disclosure of
communications data. Section 57 of the Act requires me to keep under review
the exercise and performance by the persons on whom they are conferred or
imposed these powers and duties. Chapter II of Part I is not yet in force. A draft
Order adding a number of additional public authorities to the RIPA access to
communications data provisions was laid before Parliament in June 2002.
However, following controversy in Parliament and elsewhere, the Home
Secretary decided to withdraw the RIPA Order to allow for wider consultation
on the issue. As part of this consultation process I had a very useful meeting in
November 2002 with the consultants appointed by the Home Secretary to the
communications data review group.
24. At the end of the full consultation exercise new proposals will be brought
forward on access to communications data and a new Order placed before
Parliament. It is anticipated that this will be done before Parliament rises for
the summer recess in July 2003 with implementation occurring by the end of
2003.
25. The delay in bringing into force Part I Chapter II is well documented.
However, I have to report the ongoing concerns expressed to me by the
agencies of the failure to implement this part of the legislation and its relevant
Code of Practice. I understand that this problem is compounded by real
difficulties in implementing Part 11 of the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security
Act regarding retention of data. Until these communications data issues are
resolved Part III of RIPA — investigation of electronic data protected by
encryption — is unlikely to be addressed.
Prisons
26. In paragraph 59 of my report last year, I highlighted the fact that I had
been asked by the Home Secretary to oversee the interception of
communications in prisons for police and security purposes. Although this
function does not fall within my statutory jurisdiction under RIPA, I agreed, in
principle, to undertake this role given my experience of, and responsibility for,
the interception of communications under that legislation. I have now had the
opportunity to undertake familiarisation visits to five establishments—HM
Prison Belmarsh, HM Prison High Down, HM Prison and Young Offenders
Institution Doncaster, HM Young Offenders Institution and Remand Centre
Glen Parva and HM Young Offenders Institution and Remand Centre
Feltham.
27.
At all the establishments there were three primary areas of inspection:
5