2013 Annual Report of the Interception of Communications Commissioner
3.37 It is important that we scrutinise a sufficient representative sample of the individual
warrants. The representative sample includes appropriate selections from various crime
types and national security threats. But, in my view, inspecting and understanding systems
is in the end as important as scrutinising yet more individual warrant applications.
3.38 Inspection Reports. The reports contain formal recommendations with a
requirement for the interception agency to report back to me within two months to say
that the recommendations have been implemented, or what progress has been made.
These are sensitive documents, but, speaking generally, they contain:
•
•
•
•
an account of the inspection, including a list of the particular warrants
inspected;
assessments of the interception agency’s compliance with statutory
requirements;
an account of the errors reported by the interception agency to my office
during the inspection period; and
a number of structural recommendations aimed at improving the interception
agency’s compliance and performance generally.
Inspection Findings and Recommendations.
3.39
My inspections demonstrate that the paperwork is almost always compliant and
of a high quality. If there are occasional technical lapses, these are almost always ironed
out in the interception agencies themselves or in the Secretary of State’s department
before the application reaches the relevant Secretary of State.
3.40 The Secretaries of State themselves are entirely conscientious in undertaking their
RIPA 2000 Part I Chapter I duties. They do not rubber stamp applications. On the contrary,
they sometimes reject applications or require more information. Since a warrant cannot
be issued for a shorter period than the statutory period, Secretaries of State sometimes
require a report to be made to them within a short time period - for example after 1 or 2
weeks - of the effectiveness in practice of the warrant. This is with a view to its possible
cancellation if in the light of experience it can no longer be properly justified.
3.41 The total number of specific recommendations made in our inspection reports
for the 9 interception agencies was 65, on average about 7 recommendations for each
agency. Figure 2 (overleaf) shows the breakdown of recommendations by category.
3.42 Some of the 65 are the same recommendation for more than one agency, for
example that the agency should keep its Retention, Storage and Destruction policy
and schedule up to date for my continuing inspection (see my investigation on this in
paragraphs 3.48 to 3.57 of this report).
11