Thanks, Andrew
The message re communications seems clear - interception, monitoring and
recording is lawful only if it satisfies various conditions, one of the most
important being to let people know that this is part of your normal business
practice.
My confusion now, is whether, if an institution suspects that an individual
is engaged in criminal/disciplinary activities, Part II of the Act requires
that the institution must have the authority of, eg, the police, before it
can undertake directed covert surveillance (by whatever means that happens
to be)?
This would seem reasonable and, given the requirements of the Data
Protection Act and the Human Rights Act, would be an extra safeguard to
ensure legality of operation. Is this what others think? Or am I wide of
the mark here?
Regards
Craig
-----------------------------------------------
Craig S R Brown
Assistant Data Protection Officer
Registrar's Office
University of Leicester
University Road
Leicester
LE1 7RH
Tel: 0116 252 5077 Fax: 0116 252 5000
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Cormack [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 5:58 PM
> To: Craig Brown
> Cc: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Grim RIPA?
>
> At 17:01 18/04/01 +0100, Craig Brown wrote:
> >I've been looking at the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (and the
> >Explanatory Notes). It's not easy reading. Can anyone clarify:
> >
> >a) is it Sections 1 to 4 (particularly 4(3)) and Sections 27 to 30 that
> >universities should be looking at?
> >
> >b) do sections 1 to 4 mean a university can intercept/monitor provided
> it's
> >with consent or is for purposes connected with the provision of the
> >postal/telecoms service?
> >
> >c) do sections 27 to 30 mean that a university can only undertake covert
> >surveillance if authorised to do so, eg by the police?
> >
> >Thanks
> >Craig
> >
> >Craig Brown
> >Assistant Data Protection Officer
> >University of Leicester
>
> Craig,
> I'm not a lawyer, so I'd very much welcome comment from those who are,
> especially if I've got something wrong. In particular I've not worked out
> what sorts of conduct would come under Part II of the Act rather than
> being
> permitted by Part I clauses.
>
> Universities seem to have been judged to be private telecomms networks
> (I've not heard of any who have received notices to inform them
> otherwise).
> In that case I believe you've picked out the relevant sections. There are
> also the Lawful Business Practice Regulations which give a few more
> permissions to intercept (see
> http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/si/si2000/20002699.htm). After
> listening
> to quite a few lawyers talking about RIP I put together an article with my
>
> interpretation of Part I and the LBP regulations for UKERNA News: that can
>
> be found at
> (http://www.ja.net/documents/UKERNA_News/2000/december/UKERNA_News13.html#
> 10
> ). As mentioned above, I've not got my head around Part II yet.
>
> Hope that helps, or at least stimulates further discussion,
> Andrew
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> Andrew Cormack
> Head of CERT
> UKERNA, Atlas Centre, Chilton, Didcot, Oxon. OX11 0QS
>
> Phone: 01235 822 302 E-mail: [log in to unmask]
> Fax: 01235 822 398
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
If you wish to leave this list please send the command
leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
All user commands can be found at : -
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/user-manual/summary-user-commands.htm
all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|