of Commons’ Joint Committee on Human Rights I think it is right to record that
my predecessor as Interception of Communications Commissioner – Sir Swinton
Thomas – did give oral evidence to that Committee in public on 12 March 2007 on
whether or not to relax the ban on the admissibility of intercept evidence. Whilst
Sir Swinton Thomas and I share the same view that the benefits of any change in
the law are heavily outweighed by the disadvantages, I do not intend rehearsing
here the arguments that Sir Swinton Thomas addressed to the Committee. These
have been reflected in the Committee’s Nineteenth Report of the 2006-2007
Session published on 30 July 2007 (HL Paper 157, HC 394).
Section 6: The Investigatory Powers Tribunal
Statistics
6.1 The Investigatory Powers Tribunal (the Tribunal) was established by section
65 of RIPA. The Tribunal came into being on 2 October 2000 and from that date
assumed responsibility for the jurisdiction previously held by the Interception
of Communications Tribunal, the Security Service Tribunal and the Intelligence
Services Tribunal and the complaints function of the Commissioner appointed
under the Police Act 1997 as well as for claims under the Human Rights Act.
The President of the Tribunal is Lord Justice Mummery with Mr. Justice Burton
acting as Vice-President. In addition, five senior members of the legal profession
serve on the Tribunal. A Registrar has also been appointed to help in the process
of hearing claims alleging infringements of the Human Rights Act.
6.2 As I explained in paragraph 39 of my Annual Report for 2006, complaints to
the Investigatory Powers Tribunal cannot easily be “categorised” under the three
Tribunal systems that existed prior to RIPA. Consequently, I am unable to detail
those complaints that relate to the interception of communications that would
previously have been considered by the Interception of Communications Tribunal.
I can only provide the information on the total number of complaints made to the
Investigatory Powers Tribunal. The Tribunal received 66 new applications during the
calendar year 1 January 2007 – 31 December 2007 and completed its investigation
of 31 of these during the year as well as concluding its investigation of 52 of the
cases carried over from 2007. 41 cases have been carried forward to 2008.
Assistance to the Tribunal
6.3 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.
During 2007 I was asked by the Tribunal President to assist the Tribunal on one
occasion. The legislation precludes me from identifying details of the particular
complaint but for the purposes of this Report I can say that I provided advice to
the President as to whether the test of “necessity” was correctly applied when an
agency was considering whether or not it was “necessary” for a particular person’s
telephone calls to be intercepted “for the purpose of preventing or detecting serious
crime”.
Section 7: Conclusion
7.1 As I said in my first Report last year, the interception of communications
is an invaluable weapon for the purposes set out in section 5(3) of RIPA. It has
continued to play a vital part in the battle against terrorism and serious crime, and
one that would not have been achieved by other means. The task of the agencies
working in this field has become, and is becoming ever more, technical and
difficult as a result of the greater sophistication of terrorists and criminals. I am
satisfied that Ministers and the intelligence and law enforcement agencies carry
out the work which I am required to consider diligently and in accordance with the
law.
15