IPCO Annual Report 2017
Designing IPCO
2.4
The work designing IPCO was started by a number of Home Office officials before my
appointment. I am extremely grateful for the extensive and robust underpinnings that
were then provided; whilst we have made various changes to this initial work in the light of
experience, the core structure of IPCO remains as it was originally envisaged. There are three
delivery functions and three complementary supporting functions. All these components
need to be in place and properly resourced for IPCO to run efficiently and effectively.
2.5
The delivery functions are:
• The judicial review of the use by public authorities of their investigatory powers. This work
is carried out by 15 Judicial Commissioners (‘Commissioners’ or ‘JCs’), assisted by a team
of officials who manage and run the review process;
• The inspections of the use by public authorities of their investigatory powers. In the future,
a number of JCs will lead this work, which is carried out primarily by a team of IPCO
inspectors; and
• Engagement with the Government, Parliament, international partners, civil society,
academia and the media, in order to explain IPCO’s role and how we carry out our
responsibilities. This work will be run by a small engagement team once they are in
post, but last year it fell primarily to the Interim Chief Executive and myself, with the
considerable support of an inspector who agreed to lead on this function.
2.6
The support functions are:
• Technological advice to those in IPCO performing our oversight function, namely the
JCs when considering applications for warrants and the inspectorate when investigating
post‑facto compliance. In the main, this is provided by the Technology Advisory Panel (TAP),
although I hope there will be a permanent member of staff who will assist in this area;
• Legal advice to the Commissioners and Inspectors. This is provided by a small legal team,
supported by our standing counsel; and
• Administrative and secretariat support. This is provided by officials in the secretariat
and the review team.
2.7
Our focus since September 2017 has centrally been on setting up the processes which will
ensure the efficient judicial review of applications for warrants. Once the Investigatory
Powers Act 2016 (the Act) is fully in force, we expect the review team to receive about
twelve thousand applications a year, through a number of different IT systems, some of
which are antiquated and extremely unreliable. The JCs have undergone a detailed and
substantial induction programme to ensure they are familiar with the relevant technology
and operational techniques. They have received presentations by Government and civil
society on the necessity and proportionality of a range of the investigative opportunities
that are used by the law enforcement and intelligence agencies.
2.8
During the course of a number of ‘judicial seminars’, the Commissioners have considered, in
some significant detail, a number of the legal issues which will be of particular importance
to the applications for warrants. This exercise was begun well ahead of the commencement
of the specific investigatory powers, so as to ensure that our expectations of the public
authorities were well understood and to give ample time for the agencies to make any
necessary changes to their processes in order to ensure compliance with the Act.
9