Additional governance over surveillance laws won't work
'Security agencies must be the subject of effective scrutiny and independent oversight', says Bar Council
The Bar Council has welcomed the government's recognition of privacy and civil liberties in a response to a Home Office consultation on the Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill 2014-15.
The consultation includes provision for the creation of a Privacy and Civil Liberties Board (PCLB) amid concerns over renewed terrorism threats.
However, chairman of the Bar, Alistair MacDonald QC, said that while there was no doubt that counter-terrorism legislation protects and saves lives in times of increased threat, it was all the more important that fundamental rights be protected in the clamour for greater surveillance powers.
MacDonald went on to say that clause 36 of Bill, which would create a PCLB, would "miss the point".
"Terror legislation, which gives security agencies access to our most intimate details, must be the subject of effective scrutiny and independent oversight, and the creation of a Privacy and Civil Liberties Board, as outlined in the consultation, will not achieve this aim," he added.
The chairman of the Bar said that setting up such a board to scrutinise terror legislation could cost up to £800,000 per year, but removing restrictions on David Anderson QC, who is already paid by the government to do this, and allowing him to review all relevant terror laws, would be cheaper and more effective.
"Already there exists an Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation (IRTL), [Anderson], whose job is to scrutinise terror laws in light of civil liberties and privacy concerns. Scrutiny would better, and more cheaply, be achieved by giving the Independent Reviewer the scope he needs to review the relevant legislation, and the extra resources he has asked for.
Further, MacDonald argued that there was a crowded oversight community already in existence and that it was not clear how another board would help. "It could just generate confusion and undermine rather than reinforce public understanding of the process," he added.
Photo credit: Gil C / Shutterstock.com
John van der Luit-Drummond is legal reporter for Solicitors Journal
john.vanderluit@solicitorsjournal.co.uk