24
IPCO Annual Report 2018
4. Engagement
Overview
4.1
It is an important priority for the Investigatory Powers Commissioner’s Office (IPCO) to
engage with relevant external bodies and individuals. Full details of the Investigatory Power
Commissioner’s (IPC’s) external engagements are given at Annex E. During 2018, we met
Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs), academics, the Investigatory Powers Tribunal
(IPT) and overseas oversight bodies, along with representatives of the bodies over whom
we have oversight. Discussions were held on a wide range of topics from the Consolidated
Guidance through to the approach the Judicial Commissioners (JCs) should take when
reviewing warrant applications. The IPC’s ambition is that this engagement should happen
on a more regular and structured basis than the present ad hoc and partial arrangements
but, nonetheless, to date this has provided invaluable assistance to IPCO.
4.2
We aim to strengthen oversight internationally by developing collective understanding
of how oversight is undertaken by each nation. There are undoubted impediments to
international cooperation by oversight bodies, as the sensitivity of the work of national
security agencies will frequently mean it is necessary to protect the details of intelligence
operations and capabilities. This creates an obstacle to the open dialogue that would
otherwise accompany unrestricted collaboration. Additionally, domestic legislation and
other obligations and restrictions within each country may impose restraints on joint
activity. That said, there is a strong mutual belief in, and a desire to achieve, international
cooperation to the extent that it is legitimately achievable in the context of the oversight of
investigatory powers.
UK engagement
4.3
By way of example of our approach in this area, IPCO participated in a project with the
Human Rights, Big Data and Technology Project at the University of Essex, contributing to
discussions concerning the authorisation process and how oversight of digital-surveillance
practices should best be conducted. We were pleased to take part in a series of workshops
on specific topics concerning surveillance techniques.
4.4
These workshops enhanced IPCO’s understanding of some of the public concerns about
intrusive powers, including bulk collection of communications data (CD) and the sharing of
intelligence with overseas agencies. There were also wide-ranging discussions on the issue
of accountability.
4.5
Chapters 2 and 10 detail our engagement with a range of interested parties in relation
to the review of the Consolidated Guidance and our ambition to improve the clarity
of information published on how the Guidance is used by Her Majesty’s Government
(HMG). IPCO completed a formal consultation process to receive the views of civil society
and others with an interest in this area, such as NGOs, academics, other Government
departments and the intelligence services. Specifically, we have spoken on several