Security Services

Question 1

3 main security services.

Answer 1

• Security Service
• Secret Intelligence Service
• GCHQ

Question 2

Malone v UK.

Answer 2

• placed all security services under statutory footing
• UK breached art8 as no prescription in law for intercepting communication
• they had no scope or manner of exercising relevant discretion

Question 3

R(Mohamed) v Sec of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs.

Answer 3

• appeal to prevent evidence being disclosed due to means of torture used to extract it
• held that such documents could be disclosed
• this was in accordance with natural justice

Question 4

What 3 statutes where introduced post Malone?

Answer 4

Security Service Act 1989 - MI5
Intelligence and Service Act 1994 - MI6, GCHQ
Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000

Question 5

When and why were security services placed under statutory footing?

Answer 5

Council of Europe recommends that they must operate under statutory basis as a means of accountability.
Post Malone v UK (1979)

Question 6

When was the investigatory powers tribunal established?

Answer 6

• Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000

Question 7

What powers were created by the passing of the Justice and Security Act 2013?

Answer 7

Intelligence and Security Committee can make information requests to the:

Director-Gen of Security Service
Chief of SIS
Director of GCHQ

Question 8

When was the Intelligence and Security Committee established?

Answer 8

• Intelligence and Services Act 1994

Question 9

What judicial oversight is provided for in the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 ?

Answer 9

2 commissioners:

Intelligence Service Commissioner:
- external oversight of use of intrusive powers of UK intelligence services

Interception of Communications Commissioner:
- review interception of communications as well as request disclose/acquisition

Question 10

What is the purpose of the IPT?

Answer 10

Only tribunal available for complain of security service breaching rights.
Individual complaints about agencies conduct towards them or interception of communications

Question 11

Is the IPT compatible with ECHR? (case)

Answer 11

Kennedy v UK

• applicant argued decision of no determination was incompatible with art6
• held that art6 is not an absolute right
• IPT is compatible with ECHR
• this specialised tribunal can exclude public proceedings for reasons of national security

Question 12

Verdict/s of IPT?

Answer 12

• determination

- no determination

Question 13

A v B.

Answer 13

• A sought permission to publish a book about the Service, B refused
• A sought judicial review: art 10 violation
• Held that IPT was only forum to raise complaint, as provided for by RIPA 2000

Question 14

Liberty & Others v Security Service, SIS, GCHQ.

Answer 14

• First case of a successful determination made in the IPT Tribunal
• NGO went to IPT, claimed bulk interception breached art 8 and 10

Question 15

Caroline Lucas.

Answer 15

• argued bulk interceptions violated ‘Wilson doctrine’
• IPT held that conventions are not binding
• assured applicant that sufficient safeguards are in place
• only in extreme circumstances would constituency conversations be monitored

Question 16

News Group Newspapers Limited v MET Commissioner. (plebgate)

Answer 16

• under art10, journalist are not required to reveal sources
• this is not an absolute right
• 3 part test applied
• s22 of RIPA was necessary & proportionate
• identifying sources in this instance, was lawful

Question 17

R (Davis & Watson) v Sec of State for Home Dep

Answer 17

• DRIPA 2014 was held to be inconsistent with EU law

- disapplied the act