header-logo header-logo

11 November 2020
Issue: 7910 / Categories: Legal News , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Secret agent Bill open to abuse

Planned legislation on secret agents and undercover officers creates a risk of state-sanctioned rape, murder and torture, MPs and Peers have warned

A Joint Committee on Human Rights report, ‘Legislative scrutiny: Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill’, published this week, has delivered a devastating verdict on the Bill, as it stands.

The Bill, which was introduced in the House of Commons in September, provides a statutory basis for a wide range of public authorities to authorise informants, agents and undercover officers to engage in criminal conduct. Where an authorisation has been given, a prosecutor is unlikely to proceed with a prosecution after weighing up the public interest.

The committee concluded the Bill lacks the adequate safeguards and oversight to prevent it being abused.

Harriet Harman QC MP, chair of the committee, said: ‘This Bill raises major human rights concerns.

‘It permits officials to secretly authorise crimes on the streets of the UK and abroad. There should be added to the Bill clear limits on the scale and type of criminality which can be authorised.

‘The power to authorise crime should be restricted to the public authorities whose role it is to combat serious crime and protect national security and not include bodies such as the Food Standards Agency or the Gambling Commission.’

In particular, the committee warned there was no express limit in the Bill on the type of criminal conduct that could be authorised, raising the ‘abhorrent possibility of serious crimes such as rape, murder or torture being carried out under an authorisation’.

‘Rigorous and effective oversight’ was required for a power as exceptional as the authorisation of criminal conduct, granting criminal and civil immunity. While the Investigatory Powers Commissioner provided oversight, this did not go far enough, the committee said. ‘As is required for other investigatory powers, authorising a person to engage in criminal conduct should require prior judicial approval.’

Issue: 7910 / Categories: Legal News , Constitutional law
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll