A panel of five judges recently ruled that the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT) lacks the authority to impose financial penalties on government agencies. This means the IPT, which deals with complaints about surveillance from law enforcement and intelligence, cannot penalize these agencies for ignoring its orders to provide essential evidence.
This decision comes after the tribunal found that two police forces unlawfully spied on investigative journalists Barry McCaffrey and Trevor Birney. They had exposed police corruption in their documentary, No Stone Unturned, which looked into police actions following the murder of six Catholics during a 1994 World Cup match in Loughinisland, County Down. A 2016 Ombudsman report indicated that the Royal Ulster Constabulary had obstructed justice by destroying evidence and failing to investigate properly.
Established in 2000, the IPT plays a critical role in holding public authorities accountable, especially regarding covert investigatory powers under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. Unlike other courts, the IPT operates across the UK and uses a unique, quasi-inquisitorial approach, often holding closed hearings.
While the IPT is part of the Home Office, it claims to function independently of ministers and Parliament. However, this latest ruling raises serious doubts about its independence, especially since it can’t impose costs on government bodies that flout court orders. The tribunal has now pushed for the Home Secretary to step in—either by creating new rules or passing legislation—to address this power gap. They acknowledged the situation isn’t ideal, stating, “we do not regard the outcome as entirely satisfactory.”
In the case involving the PSNI, the tribunal confirmed that the police repeatedly failed to provide crucial evidence but reiterated its lack of authority to impose costs. This situation seems almost absurd: without any power to penalize, the IPT is rendered ineffective.
Clearly, some intervention from the Home Secretary is necessary. Without new legislation or additional powers, the potential for misuse of surveillance and evidence withholding may continue unchecked. The PSNI case raises further alarm about the legal system’s integrity. If police and government agencies can withhold evidence without fear of repercussions, confidence in the system that regulates these powers may quickly deteriorate.