Report of the Interception of Communications Commissioner - July 2016
6.11 These statutory purposes and the requirement of necessity are derived directly
from Article 8 of the ECHR. To issue an interception warrant for any other purpose would
be unlawful. It is part of IOCCO’s function to make sure that all warrants are issued for
these statutory purposes only.
6.12 Proportionality. The secretary of state may not issue an interception warrant
unless he or she believes that the conduct authorised by the warrant is proportionate to
what is sought to be achieved by that conduct.
6.13 Proportionality pervades human rights jurisprudence and is a thread which runs
through RIPA. Every application for an interception warrant must address it explicitly.
Secretaries of state have to address proportionality when deciding whether to issue an
interception warrant. In doing so they have to balance (a) the necessity to engage in
potentially intrusive conduct and (b) the anticipated amount and degree of intrusion. The
judgment has to consider whether the information sought could reasonably be obtained
by less intrusive means. This is explicit for interception (section 5(4)). Warrants are refused,
or not applied for, where it is judged that the necessity does not outweigh the intrusion.
Interception Warrants
6.14 All interception warrants are for the interception of the content of communications
and the acquisition of related communications data.
6.15 Applications for interception warrants should contain the information included in
Paragraph 5.2 or 6.10 of the Code of Practice. Applications contain detailed explanations
and supporting information including specific sections on the protection of privacy, to
help the secretary of state assess the merits of the application.
6.16 Interception warrants have an initial duration of six months where the statutory
purpose is national security or economic well-being but three months where the statutory
purpose is serious crime (section 9(6) of RIPA). They cease to have effect at the end of
their period unless they are renewed.
6.17 The secretary of state may renew an interception warrant only if he or she believes
that it continues to be necessary for a statutory purpose (section 9(2) and Paragraphs
5.15 and 6.23 of the Code of Practice). Applications for renewals must justify the necessity
for renewal, giving an assessment of the intelligence value of the interception to date.
Renewal takes effect from the date on which the secretary of state signs the renewal
instrument.
6.18 The secretary of state is required to cancel an interception warrant if satisfied that
it is no longer necessary for the authorised purpose (section 9(3) and Paragraphs 5.17
and 6.25 of the Code of Practice). This in practice means that the interception agencies
should keep their warrants under continuous review and apply to cancel any warrant that
is no longer necessary. In practice, the responsibility to cancel a warrant is exercised on
www.iocco-uk.info
19