A small win on RIPA

Almost exactly a month ago, Big Brother Watch released a report analysing the use of RIPA (the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act) by local councils in Britain.

Every council was assessed on the number of times they had authorised RIPA requests over the past two years, and a number of the local authorities found themselves under pressure from their local media.

While some of these - for instance, the Leader of Walsall Council Mike Bird - shrugged off our accusations of excessive and overbearing use of what is essentially anti-terror legislation; others have recognised the need for change and this latest announcement from West Berkshire Council is particularly commendable:

Changes to the controversial legislation under which West Berkshire Council carries out covert operations have been introduced.

At the council’s Executive meeting last Thursday Hilary Cole outlined a report which covered alterations to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA), which came into force on April 6, and how it would affect the council.

The latest changes include the appointing of a Senior Responsible Officer (SRO), who would be responsible for maintaining the integrity of the process and the management of covert human intelligence sources.

The council is also required to provide quarterly update reports to the governance and audit committee, and become a member of the Anti-Fraud Network.

While Big Brother Watch would like to see the RIPA powers taken away from councils permanently, changes like this one proposed by West Berkshire show that some local authorities are finally recognising the intrusive potential that RIPA provides - and taking steps to curb it.

By Dylan Sharpe

Comments

[guy herbert]

I'm not sure this is anything to be commended, and is not proposed by West Berkshire. It is just the Council announcing that it is complying with The Regulation of Investigatory Powers (Covert Human Intelligence Sources: Code of Practice) Order 2010, and the The Regulation of Investigatory Powers (Covert Surveillance and Property Interference: Code of Practice) Order 2010.

[Jennifer H]

I also think that this is pretty meaningless. It depends entirely on the character and personal opinion of the 'Senior Responsible Officer' (SRO).

[somebloke]

"...excessive and overbearing use of what is essentially anti-terror legislation..."

Wrong. RIPA was marketed as being such because it tapped into the 'fear of terrorism' so pervasive at the time. As far as the Govt of the day was concerned, it was an easy sell if marketed as such.

In fact, it's a much wider ranging Act than that designed for the lawful interception and disclosure of communications data where it is relevant to any civil or criminal investigation and not solely those concerned with terrorism.

As far as I'm concerned, use of RIPA for council investigations of incidents such as dog fouling are to be roundly applauded. This is a very significant issue where I live and there have recently been several prosecutions for dog fouling in our area.

And I thought one of you involved with this site was a barrister? Come on, at least get the basics right...