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.