*/
The Investigatory Powers Bill weakens legal privilege and undermines fair trials, the Bar Council has warned.
Despite assurances given that the new surveillance legislation would contain protections for lawyers, the Bar Council said the Bill – introduced on 1 March – allows authorities total access to confidential, legally privileged communications between individuals and their lawyers, even when someone is in a legal dispute with the government or defending themselves against prosecution.
A cross-party scrutiny committee recommended in February that legal professional privilege should be safeguarded in the Bill.
Commenting on the ‘far reaching’ implications for fundamental rights, and the short timetable allowed for its passage, Bar Chairman, Chantal-Aimée Doerries QC, said she was ‘disappointed’ that the Bill does not provide sufficient protection for legal privilege on its face: ‘It is vital that this measure is subject to proper parliamentary scrutiny.’
Peter Carter QC, Chair of the Bar Council Surveillance and Privacy Working Group, said: ‘We have explained in very clear terms to the government that legal privilege does not apply where lawyer client communications reveal information that could be used to prevent a terror attack, foil a threat to national security, or bring an end to an ongoing crime such as a kidnapping or the abuse of a child. Neither does privilege apply where a lawyer is acting illegally.’
But he said the Bill ignores the distinction between privileged and non-privileged communications and ‘gives authorities powers to spy on sensitive, highly confidential communications that have nothing to do with criminality, national security or threats to individuals’.
The Investigatory Powers Bill weakens legal privilege and undermines fair trials, the Bar Council has warned.
Despite assurances given that the new surveillance legislation would contain protections for lawyers, the Bar Council said the Bill – introduced on 1 March – allows authorities total access to confidential, legally privileged communications between individuals and their lawyers, even when someone is in a legal dispute with the government or defending themselves against prosecution.
A cross-party scrutiny committee recommended in February that legal professional privilege should be safeguarded in the Bill.
Commenting on the ‘far reaching’ implications for fundamental rights, and the short timetable allowed for its passage, Bar Chairman, Chantal-Aimée Doerries QC, said she was ‘disappointed’ that the Bill does not provide sufficient protection for legal privilege on its face: ‘It is vital that this measure is subject to proper parliamentary scrutiny.’
Peter Carter QC, Chair of the Bar Council Surveillance and Privacy Working Group, said: ‘We have explained in very clear terms to the government that legal privilege does not apply where lawyer client communications reveal information that could be used to prevent a terror attack, foil a threat to national security, or bring an end to an ongoing crime such as a kidnapping or the abuse of a child. Neither does privilege apply where a lawyer is acting illegally.’
But he said the Bill ignores the distinction between privileged and non-privileged communications and ‘gives authorities powers to spy on sensitive, highly confidential communications that have nothing to do with criminality, national security or threats to individuals’.
Update from the Chair of the Bar
By Clement Cowley, Partner at The Penny Group
Modernising communication and collaboration at a leading Chancery set. A Zexi case study
How to build profile without compromising professional duties. By Naumaan Farooq, Co-Founder of Inked PR
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, examines the role of cut-off levels, and the wider range of factors that must be considered when interpreting results for family court proceedings
Endometriosis Awareness North, a charity raising awareness of endometriosis and supporting those affected across the North of England, has received a £500 boost from AlphaBiolabs via the company’s Giving Back initiative
A decade of reviews and research has disrupted accepted thinking in the search for causality. Suicides following abuse have overtaken domestic homicides. Is the law keeping up? Professor Susan Edwards KC (Hon) examines recent cases and the obstacles to successful prosecution
The case against judge-only justice – and why efficiency is not enough. By Professor Leslie Thomas KC
Heritage as an anchor and a compass, finding our common humanity and embracing the power of the outsider – Melina Antoniadis’s lessons learnt
Seeing the full picture – Baljit Ubhey OBE outlines the CPS action plan to tackle violence against women and girls, offering insights directly relevant to courtroom practice
Lauren Fullerton examines the how, what and why of setting up a second chambers base
