that the Council had not complied with procedures laid down in RIPA for the
grant of authorisation of the directed surveillance.
80.
The Tribunal do not accept that contention for three reasons.
81.
First, RIPA lays down specific criteria and procedures in s28 in Part II of
RIPA for the grant of an authorisation for the carrying out of directed
surveillance. Under s67(3)(b) the duties of the Tribunal expressly include an
investigation into the authority for the conduct engaged in. In considering and
determining the complaints the Tribunal are not simply concerned with
whether the outcome of the directed surveillance is a breach of the
Complainant’s Article 8 rights. They are concerned with the investigation and
determination of complaints of alleged non-compliance with RIPA procedures
for obtaining and granting authorisation
82.
Secondly, the approach requiring attention by the Tribunal to compliance with
the criteria and procedure for authorisation of surveillance is consistent with
the provision in s65(7)(b) RIPA that the “challengeable circumstances” in
which conduct to which Part II applies take place include circumstances “such
that (whether or not there is such authority) it would not have been appropriate
for the conduct to take place without it, or at least without proper
consideration having been given to whether such authority should be sought.”
83.
Thirdly, the Denbigh High School approach does not assist the Council in this
case. In that case the only relief sought from the courts was in relation to the
outcome and not for alleged breaches of procedure.
Page 24