Councils and police using dubious CCTV surveillance

Story link: Councils and police using dubious CCTV surveillance by Alan Harten

An official report states that local authorities are spying on minor offenders even though they are banned by law from doing so.

Since 2003 undercover methods have been permissible only to investigate those who are suspected to be breaking criminal law, but the chief surveillance commissioner warned that there was ‘significant concern’ that local authorities may be testing their limits of what is permissible.

CCTV monitoring topped the list of concerns.

Chief Commissioner Sir Christopher Rose published his 2208 report on Tuesday, which raised concerns that bugging public places and undercover officers are being used in situations that are not warranted by law.

Rose stated in the report that there is failure throughout law enforcement to use less intrusive methods in the place of tactics that are currently being utilised, due to a lack of education or direction by local authorities.

Authorities who are implicated for the lack of proper directives include senior officials in government departments, local authorities, and other public bodies who sign surveillance requests.

Examples of obtrusive methods include entering premises unannounced as police authorities such as undercover work or bugging phone lines.

These methods are only approved for criminal law situations and not for the investigation of tax dodgers, fly-tippers etc.

Rose stated authorising officers should be careful about the way they investigate people as one act may not be intrusive, but multiple acts can become so.

In the report, Rose also called for an end to the provision preventing MPs from being bugged in situations where it is necessary to do so, stating that members of the Parliament should not be held separate from the laws.

He also noted if the law effectively works to protect citizens’ privacy then Parliament members should not be concerned.