Interception of Communications Act 1985

Last updated

Interception of Communications Act 1985
Royal Coat of Arms of the United Kingdom (Variant 1, 2022).svg
Long title An Act to make new provision for and in connection with the interception of communications sent by post or by means of public telecommunication systems and to amend section 45 of the Telecommunications Act 1984.
Citation 1985 c. 56
Territorial extent  England and Wales, Northern Ireland
Dates
Royal assent 25 July 1985
Commencement 10 April 1986
Other legislation
Repealed by Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000
Status: Repealed
Text of statute as originally enacted

The Interception of Communications Act 1985 (1985 c. 56) was an Act of Parliament in the United Kingdom. It came into operation as of 10 April 1986.

The Act created the offence of unlawfully intercepting communications sent by post or by a "public telecommunications system"; those guilty were liable, on conviction, to a fine or up to two years imprisonment. It provided for a system of warrants to permit legal interception, and laid down cases where interception could be done lawfully, stating that having reasonable grounds to believe that the other party consented to interception was a defence.

The Act also established a complaints tribunal (which in 2000 was subsumed into the Investigatory Powers Tribunal), and created the post of Interception of Communications Commissioner to review the workings of the Act. It amended parts of the Telecommunications Act 1984.

This Act has since been repealed by schedule 1 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">GCHQ</span> British signals intelligence agency

Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) is an intelligence and security organisation responsible for providing signals intelligence (SIGINT) and information assurance (IA) to the government and armed forces of the United Kingdom. Primarily based at "The Doughnut" in the suburbs of Cheltenham, GCHQ is the responsibility of the country's Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, but it is not a part of the Foreign Office and its Director ranks as a Permanent Secretary.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (c.23) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, regulating the powers of public bodies to carry out surveillance and investigation, and covering the interception of communications. It was introduced by the Tony Blair Labour government ostensibly to take account of technological change such as the growth of the Internet and strong encryption.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mass surveillance</span> Intricate surveillance of an entire or a substantial fraction of a population

Mass surveillance is the intricate surveillance of an entire or a substantial fraction of a population in order to monitor that group of citizens. The surveillance is often carried out by local and federal governments or governmental organizations, such as organizations like the NSA, but it may also be carried out by corporations. Depending on each nation's laws and judicial systems, the legality of and the permission required to engage in mass surveillance varies. It is the single most indicative distinguishing trait of totalitarian regimes. It is also often distinguished from targeted surveillance.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Intelligence Services Act 1994</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Intelligence Services Act 1994 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom.

The Wilson Doctrine is a convention in the United Kingdom that restricts the police and intelligence services from tapping the telephones of members of the House of Commons and House of Lords. It was introduced in 1966 and named after Harold Wilson, the Labour Prime Minister who established the rule. Since it was established, the development of new forms of communication, such as mobile phones and email, has led to extensions of the doctrine. However, it was never extended to cover members of the new devolved legislatures.

Telephone call recording laws are legislation enacted in many jurisdictions, such as countries, states, provinces, that regulate the practice of telephone call recording. Call recording or monitoring is permitted or restricted with various levels of privacy protection, law enforcement requirements, anti-fraud measures, or individual party consent.

A law enforcement agency (LEA) has powers, which other government subjects do not, to enable the LEA to undertake its responsibilities. These powers are generally in one of six forms:

Homeland Security Group is an executive directorate of the UK government Home Office, created in 2007, responsible for leading the work on counter-terrorism in the UK, working closely with the police and security services. The office reports to the Home Secretary, and to the Minister of State for Security and Counter-Terrorism. Its current Director General is Chloe Squires, who is the senior government official responsible for counter-terrorist and organised crime strategy.

The Intelligence Services Commissioner, was a regulatory official in the United Kingdom appointed under Section 59 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. They are tasked with reviewing actions and warrants taken by the Secretary of State under the Intelligence Services Act 1994 and the activities of British intelligence only in regard to the use of surveillance, covert human intelligence sources and interception of communications by MI5, MI6, and GCHQ assuming such actions and activities are not being reviewed by the Interception of Communications Commissioner.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Investigatory Powers Tribunal</span> State surveillance tribunal in the United Kingdom

The Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT) is a first-instance tribunal and superior court of record in the United Kingdom. It is primarily an inquisitorial court.

The Communications Capabilities Development Programme (CCDP) is a UK government initiative to extend the government's capabilities for lawful interception and storage of communications data. It would involve the logging of every telephone call, email and text message between every inhabitant of the UK, and is intended to extend beyond the realms of conventional telecommunications media to log communications within social networking platforms such as Twitter and Facebook.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Telecommunications Act 1984</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Telecommunications Act 1984 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. The rules for the industry are now contained in the Communications Act 2003.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mass surveillance in the United Kingdom</span> Overview of mass surveillance in the United Kingdom

The use of electronic surveillance by the United Kingdom grew from the development of signal intelligence and pioneering code breaking during World War II. In the post-war period, the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) was formed and participated in programmes such as the Five Eyes collaboration of English-speaking nations. This focused on intercepting electronic communications, with substantial increases in surveillance capabilities over time. A series of media reports in 2013 revealed bulk collection and surveillance capabilities, including collection and sharing collaborations between GCHQ and the United States' National Security Agency. These were commonly described by the media and civil liberties groups as mass surveillance. Similar capabilities exist in other countries, including western European countries.

The Act on Restrictions on the Secrecy of Mail, Post and Telecommunications, Gesetz zur Beschränkung des Brief-, Post- und Fernmeldegeheimnisses in German, also known as the G-10 Act, is a German federal law that regulates the surveillance powers of Germany's intelligence agencies. The shortened and more commonly used name, ‘G-10’, refers to Article 10 of the German Basic Law, which enshrines the right to privacy of communication: It is from these provisions that the law seeks to derogate.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014 was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, repealed in 2016. It received Royal Assent on 17 July 2014, after being introduced on 14 July 2014. The purpose of the legislation was to allow security services to continue to have access to phone and internet records of individuals following a previous repeal of these rights by the Court of Justice of the European Union. The act was criticised by some Members of Parliament for the speed at which the act was passed through parliament, by some groups as being an infringement of privacy.

"Bulk personal datasets" is the UK government's euphemism for datasets containing personally identifiable information on a large number of individuals, as part of mass surveillance in the United Kingdom and on citizens around the world.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Investigatory Powers Act 2016</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Investigatory Powers Act 2016 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom which received royal assent on 29 November 2016. Its different parts came into force on various dates from 30 December 2016. The Act comprehensively sets out and in limited respects expands the electronic surveillance powers of the British intelligence agencies and police. It also claims to improve the safeguards on the exercise of those powers.

The Interception of Communications Commissioner was a regulatory official in the United Kingdom, appointed under section 57 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, and previously under section 8 of the Interception of Communications Act 1985.

<i>Malone v United Kingdom</i>

Malone v United Kingdom [1984] ECHR 10 is a UK constitutional law case, concerning the rule of law.

Copland v United Kingdom [2007] ECHR 253 is an ECHR case about UK labour law, English contract law case and health care in the UK.

References