By Alex Klaushofer
22 July 2009
Local authorities are continuing to spy on residents to detect minor offences, the chief surveillance commissioner has found.
In his 2008 annual report, published on July 21, Sir Christopher Rose said that it was of ‘significant concern’ that some councils were still using covert techniques to police offences such as dog fouling or litter dropping.
Under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, councils are permitted to use undercover surveillance techniques, but a 2003 change in the law meant that they are to be used only when criminal activity is suspected.
The report pointed to ‘continuing failure’ by authorising officers to demonstrate that less intrusive methods have been considered, and to ‘continuing confusion’ about when the use of surveillance methods such as CCTV in public places is appropriate.
In 2008/09, there were 2,681 ‘property interference authorisations’, compared with 2,493 authorisations the previous year. Authorisations for intrusive surveillance rose to 384, a slight increase on the 355 of the previous year.
‘These powers can make a real difference in delivering safer communities and protecting the public,’ said Home Secretary Alan Johnson. ‘Of course, it's vital that we strike the right balance between individual privacy and collective security and that is why I am clear these powers should be used only when they are proportionate.’
The Home Office had recently completed a public consultation on the revised codes of practice governing the use of covert surveillance powers, he added.
A spokesman for Poole Borough Council, which hit the headlines last year for filming a mother to determine whether her daughter came within her claimed school catchment area, said that the authority no longer used the Act’s powers for school admissions.
‘We have used it on three occasions in the last year for antisocial behaviour,’ he added.
22 July 2009
Local authorities are continuing to spy on residents to detect minor offences, the chief surveillance commissioner has found.
In his 2008 annual report, published on July 21, Sir Christopher Rose said that it was of ‘significant concern’ that some councils were still using covert techniques to police offences such as dog fouling or litter dropping.
Under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, councils are permitted to use undercover surveillance techniques, but a 2003 change in the law meant that they are to be used only when criminal activity is suspected.
The report pointed to ‘continuing failure’ by authorising officers to demonstrate that less intrusive methods have been considered, and to ‘continuing confusion’ about when the use of surveillance methods such as CCTV in public places is appropriate.
In 2008/09, there were 2,681 ‘property interference authorisations’, compared with 2,493 authorisations the previous year. Authorisations for intrusive surveillance rose to 384, a slight increase on the 355 of the previous year.
‘These powers can make a real difference in delivering safer communities and protecting the public,’ said Home Secretary Alan Johnson. ‘Of course, it's vital that we strike the right balance between individual privacy and collective security and that is why I am clear these powers should be used only when they are proportionate.’
The Home Office had recently completed a public consultation on the revised codes of practice governing the use of covert surveillance powers, he added.
A spokesman for Poole Borough Council, which hit the headlines last year for filming a mother to determine whether her daughter came within her claimed school catchment area, said that the authority no longer used the Act’s powers for school admissions.
‘We have used it on three occasions in the last year for antisocial behaviour,’ he added.
