This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jul/16/two-police-forces-breached-code-on-protection-of-journalists-sources

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Two police forces breached code on protection of journalists' sources Two police forces breached code on protection of journalists' sources
(35 minutes later)
Two police forces have in the past three months breached a new revised code of practice into protection of journalists’ sources, according to a report by the interception of communications commissioner.Two police forces have in the past three months breached a new revised code of practice into protection of journalists’ sources, according to a report by the interception of communications commissioner.
The new code, which was introduced after allegations that the police had abused their powers, recommended that adequate safeguards be put in place to protect journalistic sources. David Cameron accepted the recommendations and the new code came into effect in March.The new code, which was introduced after allegations that the police had abused their powers, recommended that adequate safeguards be put in place to protect journalistic sources. David Cameron accepted the recommendations and the new code came into effect in March.
But the report published on Thursday by the commissioner, Sir Anthony May, expressed concern that there have been two breaches since then. “Two police forces have acquired communications data to identify the interactions between journalists and their sources in two investigations without obtaining judicial approval,” he said. But the report published on Thursday by the commissioner, Sir Anthony May, expressed concern that there had been two breaches since then. “Two police forces have acquired communications data to identify the interactions between journalists and their sources in two investigations without obtaining judicial approval,” he said.
May, who is responsible for keeping tabs on the intelligence agencies, police forces and other public authorities engaged in the interception and acquisition of communications data, said: “In the first case, a police force acquired the communications data for a journalist and a known associate who was also their source. The crime under investigation related to attempting to pervert the course of justice in the midst of an ongoing criminal trial. The trial judge was aware of the police force initiating a criminal investigation into the activities of the journalist.”May, who is responsible for keeping tabs on the intelligence agencies, police forces and other public authorities engaged in the interception and acquisition of communications data, said: “In the first case, a police force acquired the communications data for a journalist and a known associate who was also their source. The crime under investigation related to attempting to pervert the course of justice in the midst of an ongoing criminal trial. The trial judge was aware of the police force initiating a criminal investigation into the activities of the journalist.”
He added: “In the second case, a police force acquired communications data relating to a suspected journalistic source working within the police force and a former employee of the force suspected to be acting as an intermediary.”He added: “In the second case, a police force acquired communications data relating to a suspected journalistic source working within the police force and a former employee of the force suspected to be acting as an intermediary.”
He said the two cases had only recently been identified by his inspectors and he was awaiting full details to see whether there had been any wilful or reckless failure by an individual within a public authority.He said the two cases had only recently been identified by his inspectors and he was awaiting full details to see whether there had been any wilful or reckless failure by an individual within a public authority.
In general, May said, the speed with which the code had been enacted meant inspectors appeared to be fine-tuning government policy and implementing it rather than auditing it.In general, May said, the speed with which the code had been enacted meant inspectors appeared to be fine-tuning government policy and implementing it rather than auditing it.
The report also elaborated on 17 serious errors in the acquisition of communications data in 2014, of which one led to a wrongful arrest in relation to a police investigation into sexual exploitation. Three warrants were executed at the premises. Searches of all the seized computer equipment found no incriminating evidence.The report also elaborated on 17 serious errors in the acquisition of communications data in 2014, of which one led to a wrongful arrest in relation to a police investigation into sexual exploitation. Three warrants were executed at the premises. Searches of all the seized computer equipment found no incriminating evidence.
In a separate development, the chief inspector of prisons, Nick Hardwick, published a report into the monitoring of communications between prisoners and MPs.In a separate development, the chief inspector of prisons, Nick Hardwick, published a report into the monitoring of communications between prisoners and MPs.
“I have not found evidence of a widespread, deliberate attempt to monitor communications with MPs and I believe that the majority of calls were downloaded for listening in error. In a small number of calls, I have found evidence that suggests the rules were deliberately broken,” Hardwick said. A formal inquiry has been established to see whether there have been any disciplinary offences.“I have not found evidence of a widespread, deliberate attempt to monitor communications with MPs and I believe that the majority of calls were downloaded for listening in error. In a small number of calls, I have found evidence that suggests the rules were deliberately broken,” Hardwick said. A formal inquiry has been established to see whether there have been any disciplinary offences.
Since 2006, in prisons using the BT system, prisoners have made around 5,600 calls to MPs, of which 56% were recorded. Of the recordings, 280 were downloaded to a playback system and probably listened to on 358 occasions, the report says.Since 2006, in prisons using the BT system, prisoners have made around 5,600 calls to MPs, of which 56% were recorded. Of the recordings, 280 were downloaded to a playback system and probably listened to on 358 occasions, the report says.
Five cases were identified as being of particular concern, three of which involved the same prisoner, who called three MPs: Paul Burstow, Edward Davey and Conor Murphy.Five cases were identified as being of particular concern, three of which involved the same prisoner, who called three MPs: Paul Burstow, Edward Davey and Conor Murphy.