COVERT HUMAN INTELLIGENCE SOURCES
CODE OF PRACTICE
4.26 Tasking is the assignment given to the
source by the persons defined at sections
29(5)(a) and (b) of the 2000 Act, asking
him to obtain information, to provide
access to information or to otherwise act,
incidentally, for the benefit of the
relevant public authority. Authorisation
for the use or conduct of a source is
required prior to any tasking where such
tasking requires the source to establish
or maintain a personal or other
relationship for a covert purpose. 4.27 The person referred to in section
29(5)(a) of the 2000 Act will have day to
day responsibility for
- dealing with the source on behalf of the
authority concerned;
- directing the day to day activities of the
source;
- recording the information supplied by the
source; and
- monitoring the source's security and
welfare;
4.28 The person referred to in section 29(5)(b)
of the 2000 Act will be responsible for the
general oversight of the use of the source.
4.29 In some instances, the tasking
given to a
person will not require the source to
establish a personal or other relationship
for a covert purpose. For example a source
may be tasked with finding out purely
factual information about the layout of
commercial premises. Alternatively, a
trading standards officer may be involved in
the test purchase of items which have been
labelled misleadingly or are unfit for
consumption. In such cases, it is for the
relevant public authority to determine
where, and in what circumstances, such
activity may require authorisation. 4.30 It is not the intention that
authorisations be drawn so narrowly that a
separate authorisation is required each time
the source is tasked. Rather, an
authorisation might cover, in broad terms,
the nature of the source's task. If this
changes, then a new authorisation may need
to be sought.
4.31 It is difficult to predict exactly what
might occur each time a meeting with a
source takes place, or the source meets the
subject of an investigation. There may be
occasions when unforeseen action or
undertakings occur. When this happens, the
occurrence must be recorded as soon as
practicable after the event and, if the
existing authorisation is insufficient it
should either be updated and reauthorised
(for minor amendments only) or it should
cancelled and a new authorisation should be
obtained before any further such action is
carried out.
4.32 Similarly where it is intended to task a
source in a new way or significantly greater
way than previously identified, the persons
defined at section 29(5)(a) or (b) of the
2000 Act must refer the proposed tasking to
the authorising officer, who should consider
whether a separate authorisation is
required. This should be done in advance of
any tasking and the details of such
referrals must be recorded.
4.33 Public authorities should ensure
that arrangements are in place for the proper oversight
and management of sources, including appointing individual
officers as defined in section 29(5)(a) and (b) of the
2000 Act for each source.
4.34 The person responsible for the day-to-day
contact between the public authority and the source
will usually be of a rank or position below that of
the authorising officer.
In cases where the authorisation is for the use or conduct
of a source whose activities benefit more than a single
public authority, responsibilities for the management
and oversight of that source may be taken up by one
authority or can be split between the authorities.
4.36 Any public authority deploying a source
should take into account the safety and welfare of that
source, when carrying out actions in relation to an
authorisation or tasking, and to foreseeable consequences
to others of that tasking. Before authorising the use
or conduct of a source, the authorising officer should
ensure that a risk assessment is carried out to determine
the risk to the source of any tasking and the likely
consequences should the role of the source become known.
The ongoing security and welfare of the source, after
the cancellation of the authorisation, should also be
considered at the outset.
4.37 The person defined at section 29(5)(a)
of the 2000 Act is responsible for bringing to the
attention of the person defined at section 29(5)(b)
of the 2000 Act any concerns about the personal circumstances
of the source, insofar as they might affect:
- the validity of the risk assessment
- the conduct of the source, and
- the safety and welfare of the source.
4.38 Where deemed appropriate, concerns about
such matters must be considered by the authorising
officer, and a decision taken on whether or not to
allow the authorisation to continue.
4.39 Subject to paragraph 4.40 below, the
interception of communications sent by post or by means
of public telecommunications systems or private telecommunications
systems attached to the public network may be authorised
only by the Secretary of State, in accordance with the
terms of Part I of the 2000 Act. Nothing in this code
should be taken as granting dispensation from the requirements
of that Part of the 2000 Act.
4.40 Part I of the 2000 Act provides certain
exceptions to the rule that interception of telephone
conversations must be warranted under that Part. This
includes, where one party to the communication consents
to the interception, it may be authorised in accordance
with section 48(4) of the 2000 Act provided that there
is no interception warrant authorising the interception.
In such cases, the interception is treated as directed
surveillance (see chapter 4 of the Covert Surveillance
code of practice).
4.41 A source, whether or not
wearing or carrying a surveillance device and invited
into residential premises or a private vehicle, does
not require additional authorisation to record any activity
taking place inside those premises or vehicle which
take place in his presence. This also applies to the
recording of telephone conversations other than by interception
which takes place in the source's presence. Authorisation
for the use or conduct of that source may be obtained
in the usual way.
4.42 However, if a surveillance
device is to be used, other than in the presence of
the source, an intrusive surveillance authorisation
and if applicable an authorisation for interference
with property should be obtained.
Contents |
Next: OVERSIGHT
Top
of page
|
