its investigation of 66 of the 76 cases carried over from 2003. 51 cases have been
carried forward to 2005. On no occasion during 2004 has the Tribunal concluded
that there has been a contravention of RIPA or the Human Rights
Act 1998.
Assistance to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal
38. Section 57(3) of RIPA requires me to give all such assistance to the Tribunal
as the Tribunal may require in relation to investigations and other specified
matters. I was not asked to assist the Tribunal during the year 2004.
Rulings on Preliminary Issues of Law
39. The Investigatory Powers Tribunal have handed down two important and
related Rulings on Preliminary Issues of Law on 23 January 2003 and 09
December 2004. The judgments cover a number of issues which it is not
appropriate for me to set out in this Report, but, for those who are interested, they
can be accessed shortly on the Tribunal’s website [www.ipt-uk.com].
40. The Ruling of 23 January 2003 does not directly affect my role as
Commissioner, but the Ruling of 09 December 2004 does have relevance to it,
and I will, therefore, quote the relevant passages:
Paragraph 3:
The issue was whether, as formulated by the Complainants’ Counsel, “the
process of filtering intercepted telephone calls made from the UK to
overseas telephones … breaches Article 8(2) [of the European Convention
on Human Rights] because it is not “in accordance with the law”. Article 8
reads as follows:
“1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home
and his correspondence.
2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of
this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a
democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the
economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime,
for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and
freedoms of others.”
Paragraph 5:
RIPA provides for two different “regimes”: the s81(1) regime with regard to
the interception of communications transmitted and received within the
United Kingdom (“internal telecommunications”) and the s8(4) regime,
relating to telephone communications between the United Kingdom and
abroad (“external communications”). However, there are, as will be seen,
substantial similarities between the provisions governing such regimes. In
particular, both the s8(1) and s8(4) warrants are subject to the provisions of
s5 of RIPA, which provides for the issue of warrants in relation to the
interception of communications by the Secretary of State in subsection (1).
Paragraph 6:
The relevant provisions governing both regimes are contained in the
following subsections of s5:
“(2) The Secretary of State shall not issue an interception warrant unless he
believes –
(a) that the warrant is necessary on grounds falling within subsection (3);
and
8