- UPDATE -
June 2013: In June
2013 a leaked document apparently revealed that
the US intelligence community are tapping into US internet companies to track
online communication in a programme known as Prism. The reports also suggest UK
access to and use of this data. Find out more.
State sanctioned surveillance against specific individuals takes place on a
massive scale, using the broad and confusing framework created under the
Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) which regulates the use of
and access to surveillance by public bodies.
This involves five types of different surveillance:
- Interception
of communications – e.g. listening to telephone calls, reading letters and
emails
- Intrusive
surveillance – e.g. placing bugs and filming in private places
- Directed
surveillance – e.g. filming and covertly monitoring specific people
generally in public places
- Use of
covert human intelligence sources – e.g. informants and undercover
operatives
- Accessing
communications data – e.g accessing the record (but not the content) of
emails, telephone calls and websites visited.
Under RIPA hundreds of public bodies have access to the last three types of
surveillance including over 470 local authorities. Surveillance can be
authorised for a wide range of purposes which includes such vague purposes as
preventing ‘disorder’ or collecting tax.
Interception of communications and some types of intrusive surveillance are
authorised by the Home Secretary and other types of surveillance are largely
self-authorised.
Liberty
believes that RIPA must be reformed to ensure that intrusions into personal
privacy are all properly authorised and comply with human rights principles of
necessity and proportionality.
The main changes we are calling for are:
- All
interception of communications and intrusive surveillance should be
authorised by judicial warrant.
- All other
types of surveillance should be independently authorised
- The
Government should not require “communications data” (records of emails,
phone calls, text messages etc) to be retained by telecommunications
service providers without individual suspicion of wrongdoing.
- The number
and type of public bodies that have access to surveillance powers should
be reduced.
- Surveillance
is too often authorised for vague, broad or trivial reasons and powers
should only be used in more serious situations.
- The
Investigatory Powers Tribunal is where most applications for review of
surveillance powers must go, but the procedure is fundamentally flawed and
needs to be overhauled.
Liberty’s
position on RIPA is set out in greater detail in this consultation
response (PDF).
The Coalition Government included RIPA in their 2010 Review of Counter
Terror and Security Powers - read our response to the Counter
Terror Review consultation (PDF).