Surveillance activities by the police and security services should be maintained and agencies should have the right to gather bulk communications data, a new landmark report has ruled.
The report, commissioned
by Home Secretary Theresa May and carried out by John Anderson
QC, concedes that ministers should not be allowed to authorize
individual warrants for the interception of data.
The analysis was triggered by revelations of mass surveillance by
NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden in 2013, but also covers the
implications of May’s so-called ‘snoopers’ charter’, which is
expected to give the police extra powers to gather data.
READ MORE:
‘GCHQ doesn’t spy on everyone, we don’t have enough staff’ –
intelligence officer
In his introduction to the report, Anderson says: “Modern
communications networks can be used by the unscrupulous for
purposes ranging from cyber-attack, terrorism and espionage to
fraud, kidnap and child sexual exploitation. A successful
response to these threats depends on entrusting public bodies
with the powers they need to identify and follow suspects in a
borderless online world.
“But trust requires verification. Each intrusive power must
be shown to be necessary, clearly spelled out in law, limited in
accordance with human rights standards and subject to demanding
and visible safeguards.
“The current law is fragmented, obscure, under constant
challenge and variable in the protections that it affords the
innocent. It is time for a clean slate. This report aims to help
parliament achieve a world-class framework for the regulation of
these strong and vital powers,” Anderson said.
The report adds that following the Snowden revelations the
current legislation on surveillance, the Regulation of
Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA), should be abandoned and new
measures drawn up.
“RIPA, obscure since its inception, has been patched up so
many times as to make it incomprehensible to all but a tiny band
of initiates. A multitude of alternative powers, some of them
without statutory safeguards, confuse the picture further. This
state of affairs is undemocratic, unnecessary and – in the long
run – intolerable,” Anderson writes.
Anderson also said that while the Snowden revelations had brought
greater transparency, they had harmed national security.
READ
MORE: Police granted personal data access 26 times every hour,
study reveals
“The opening up of the debate has, however, come at a cost to
national security: the effect of the Snowden documents on the
behavior of some service providers and terrorists alike has, for
the authorities, accentuated the problem of reduced coverage and
rendered more acute the need for a remedy,” the report says.
The report’s findings sit firmly in the middle of the road, which
is likely to infuriate privacy campaigners who advocate far
greater transparency in surveillance techniques and greater
levels of communications privacy.
Some groups may be appeased by the suggestion that ministers
cannot authorize the interception of data in individual cases.
Anderson’s findings are likely to be incorporated into new
policing and surveillance measures laid out in the Queen’s
Speech.
Responding to the decision to overhaul RIPA, Privacy
International Deputy Director Eric King “applauded” the
report, saying a “full root and branch” reform was
necessary to make surveillance laws more transparent.
“We now need to start again, debate and discuss every aspect
of the vast and incredibly intrusive powers we provide the police
and intelligence agencies. David Anderson’s strong
recommendations for improvement are the first step towards
reform, and now the burden is on the government, parliament and
civil society to ensure that reforms go further and ensure that
once and for all, our police and intelligence agencies are
brought under the rule of law,” he added.