2013 Annual Report of the Interception of Communications Commissioner
Points of Note
Interception of Communications
2760 interception warrants (to access the content of communications) were
authorised in 2013, a reduction of 19% on the previous year.
In 2013 I conducted 26 interception inspections. During the inspections 600
interception warrants were examined which is one third of the extant warrants at
the end of the year.
A total of 65 recommendations emanated from these inspections, on average 7
recommendations for each interception agency.
In 2013 and since, I have conducted a number of further detailed interception
investigations. A number of these related to media publications based on
disclosures reportedly made as a result of Edward Snowden’s actions. These
feature in Section 6 of this report as Questions of Concern.
My investigation into the Retention, Storage and Deletion of intercepted material
and related communications data has demonstrated that:
•
•
indiscriminate retention for long periods of unselected intercepted
material (content) does not occur. The interception agencies delete
intercepted material (if it is retained at all) after short periods and in
accordance with section 15(3) of RIPA;
related communications data are in some instances retained for a
variety of longer periods. I have yet to satisfy myself fully that some
of these periods are justified and in those cases I have required the
agencies to shorten their retention periods or, if not, provide me with
more persuasive reasons for keeping the material for the current
periods.
57 interception errors were reported to our office in 2013. There is no specific
provision in the Interception of Communications Code of Practice for errors and
this leads to a lack of consistency in the reporting. In the absence of a specific
provision I will be seeking to agree a memorandum of understanding with the
agencies.
Our inspections and investigations lead me to conclude that the Secretaries of
State and the agencies that undertake interception operations under RIPA 2000
Chapter I Part I do so lawfully, conscientiously, effectively and in the national
interest. This is subject to the specific errors reported and the inspection
recommendations. These require attention but do not materially detract from the
judgment expressed in the first sentence.
18