MR JUSTICE BURTON
Approved Judgment
Caroline Lucas MP & Ors v Security Service & Ors
operation since the beginning of this year, and complied with by the Security and
Intelligence Agencies, although it has been the subject of consultation and has not yet
been put before or approved by Parliament (“the Draft Code”).
i)
The Code
Chapter 3: Special Rules on Interception with a Warrant:
“Collateral Intrusion
3.1 Consideration should be given to any infringement of
the privacy of individuals who are not the subject of the
intended interception, especially where communications
relating to religious, medical, journalistic or legally
privileged material may be involved. An application for
an interception warrant should draw attention to any
circumstances which give rise to an unusual degree of
collateral infringement of privacy, and this will be taken
into account by the Secretary of State when considering a
warrant application. Should an interception operation
reach the point where individuals other than the subject
of the authorisation are identified as directly relevant to
the operation, consideration should be given to applying
for separate warrants covering those individuals.
Confidential Information
3.2 Particular consideration should also be given in cases
where the subject of the interception might reasonably
assume a high degree of privacy, or where confidential
information is involved. Confidential information consists
of matters subject to legal privilege, confidential personal
information or confidential journalistic material (see
paragraphs 3.9-3.11). For example, extra consideration
should be given where interception might involve
communications between a minister of religion and an
individual relating to the latter’s spiritual welfare, or
where matters of medical or journalistic confidentiality or
legal privilege may be involved.”
Chapter 4: Interception Warrants (Section 8(1))
“4.2 Each application [for a Section 8(1) Warrant] . . .
should contain the following information:
...
A consideration of any unusual degree of
collateral intrusion and why that intrusion is
justified in the circumstances. In particular,