The City Barrister and Head of
Standards submitted the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000
(RIPA) Bi-Annual Performance Report July 2024 – December 2024
to the Governance and Audit Committee. The Principal Lawyer
presented the report.
Points highlighted
included:
- There had been no use of RIPA since
the last update and no access to communications data.
- The Council had been inspected by
the Investigatory Powers Commissioners Office (IPCO) as was due
every three years. This was a paper-based exercise, and questions
had been responded to. The outcome had been positive.
Recommendations were made for minor amendments to the
Council’s Surveillance Policy. But they were satisfied with
the Council’s compliance and the next inspection would be in
2028.
- The proposed amendments to the
Surveillance Policy were noted in the report.
- In the final recommendations from
the IPCO, it was recommended that the Council continues to train
its staff on RIPA. This is primarily due to the risk factor that
staff may engage in activity that may fall under RIPA without being
aware.
- Other assurances were set out in the
report.
Members sought further
clarification and raised the below points:
- In response to a query around how
RIPA was reported and what constituted covert surveillance, it was
reiterated that the report stated that there were no authorisations
for direct surveillance or communications data between July and
December 2024. However, the need to
awareness and training was recognised so as to ensure officers
understand the legal boundaries on what is and is not permitted
under RIPA. It was further clarified
that if people were made aware that they were under surveillance,
it did not fall under the scope of RIPA.
- It was confirmed that external
trainer would be engaged to deliver. training. This would include
the use of case studies, both fictional and those from legal
cases/case law to improve understanding
- Examples of situations where RIPA
could be used included trading standards, whereby officers could go
under-cover in workplaces. While test
purchases could typically be done without RIPA authorisation, if
the operation involved covert surveillance, it would fall under the
remit of RIPA.
- In response to a query on
surveillance of Council houses, the Principal Lawyer advised that
they were not aware of any such cases, However, but it was
acknowledged that it was necessary to be mindful that any covert or
undercover activity relating to Council houses would be subject to
RIPA requirements. Regarding Right to
Buy applications, checks were carried out by the Council to confirm
the source of funds and the identity of the purchaser, but these
checks are not conducted covertly and are not considered
surveillance and therefore do not fall under RIPA.
- In response to a query about
potential uses of RIPA, it was suggested following the upcoming
training, opportunities to use RIPA more effectively could be
explored. An update on this could be included in the August
update.
RESOLVED
The Governance and Audit Committee:
•
Received the Report and note its contents.
•
Approved the proposed amendments to the Council’s
Surveillance Policy.
•
Made recommendations or comments it sees fit either to the
Executive or to the City Barrister and Head of Standards.