Sir, I was pleased to see a reference in your letters column (Feb 5) yesterday to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA).
The situation regarding the alleged bugging of conversations between Sadiq Khan, MP, and Babar Ahmed falls squarely under the remit of that Act. There are three basic questions to answer: first, was the conversation recorded? If it was not, then there is no case to answer. If it was, then the second question is was the recording authorised by a properly signed warrant? If it was, then there is again no case to answer. If not, then the final question is who ordered the recording? Note the word is ordered, not authorised, since collection of communications against an individual within the UK can only be done under the authority of a warrant. If it turns out that, as has been suggested, a senior policeman ordered the action without a warrant then he or she is liable to prosecution.
Contrary to public belief, the intelligence agencies and the police are very aware of the provisions of RIPA and go to considerable lengths to get the warrants they need to pursue their work legally.
Advertisement
The Wilson Doctrine is not enshrined in law but is well known and comes into play when a minister is presented with a warrant to sign. If collecting the communications of an MP were proposed then there would be very little chance of a minister signing the relevant warrant unless a very strong case could be made — indeed, most agencies wouldn’t even bother to ask unless they had compelling evidence, and it is likely that the matter would be referred to the Prime Minister for decision.
If the officials in this case were unaware of the provisions of RIPA it is a serious matter. If they were aware but chose to ignore them then it is even more so.
Advertisement
Mike Heenan
Highnam, Glos
Sir, The bugging of MPs is covered by the principle and spirit of the Wilson Doctrine, as ministers openly accept. I entirely agree with Professor Glees (letter, Feb 5) that it is the prerogative of the Prime Minister to choose his timing, compatible with security considerations, if he wishes to amend the rules.
Advertisement
I am afraid he is mistaken, however, to imply that I was the first to raise this issue. The Sunday Times broke the story and the Justice Secretary confirmed it, before I pointed out that — contrary to what the Government stated — I had raised the matter in correspondence with the Prime Minister in December. In my letter, I offered to treat the matter as confidential if he deemed it necessary.
David Davis, MP
Shadow Home Secretary
London SW1
Advertisement
Sir, Every day millions of people in the UK have their telephone conversations taped for “quality and training” purposes when they ring customer service lines. No question of national security involved in this practice, so perhaps an inquiry focused on this mass invasion of privacy would be more appropriate.
Susan Watson
Denholme, W Yorks
Advertisement
Sir, Given that I have to put up with CCTV cameras watching my every move, and my luggage and body being X-rayed, along with having to remove my shoes just for the pleasure of flying somewhere — in the interests of security — then I see no reason why criminals, terrorists and politicians cannot be bugged in the interests of security.
Neil Jones
London SE24