86
BIG BROTHER WATCH AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM JUDGMENT
interviews with case officers, analysts and/or linguists from
selected investigations or operations to assess whether the
interception and the justifications for acquiring all of the material
were proportionate;
the examination of any urgent oral approvals to check that the
process was justified and used appropriately;
a review of those cases where communications subject to legal
privilege or otherwise confidential information had been
intercepted and retained, and any cases where a lawyer was the
subject of an investigation;
a review of the adequacy of the safeguards and arrangements
under sections 15 and 16 of RIPA;
an investigation of the procedures in place for the retention,
storage and destruction of intercepted material and related
communications data; and
a review of the errors reported, including checking that the
measures put in place to prevent recurrence were sufficient.
182. After each inspection, inspectors produced a report, including:
an assessment of how far the recommendations from the previous
inspection had been achieved;
a summary of the number and type of interception documents
selected for inspection, including a detailed list of those warrants;
detailed comments on all warrants selected for further
examination and discussion during the inspection;
an assessment of the errors reported to the Commissioner’s office
during the inspection period;
an account of the examination of the retention, storage and
destruction procedures;
an account of other policy or operational issues which the agency
or warrant-granting departments raised during the inspection;
an assessment of how any material subject to legal professional
privilege (or otherwise confidential material) has been handled;
a number of recommendations aimed at improving compliance
and performance.
183. During 2016, the Commissioner’s office inspected all nine
interception agencies once and the four main warrant-granting departments
twice. This, together with extra visits to GCHQ, made a total of twenty-two
inspection visits. In addition, he and his inspectors arranged other ad hoc
visits to agencies.
184. Inspection of the systems in place for applying for and authorising
interception warrants usually involved a three-stage process. First, to
achieve a representative sample of warrants, inspectors selected them across
different crime types and national security threats. In addition, inspectors