This article is from the source 'bbc' 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.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33588990

The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 3 Version 4
The Sun challenges police over 'plebgate' phone records Plebgate case: Police 'violated Sun reporters' rights'
(about 7 hours later)
The Sun and three of its reporters are to challenge Metropolitan Police in the courts for accessing phone records in relation to the "plebgate" affair. Police violated the human rights of three Sun reporters by accessing their phone records during the Plebgate saga, the newspaper's lawyers told a court.
In the landmark case, the newspaper says reporters' human rights were breached in 2012. Scotland Yard sought the records in 2012 after the newspaper revealed the Downing Street row between police and then cabinet minister Andrew Mitchell.
Scotland Yard sought the records after the newspaper revealed the Downing Street row between police and then cabinet minister Andrew Mitchell. The Sun alleges police violated their right to protect "confidential sources" but the Met Police deny any wrongdoing.
Police were hunting the source amid allegations of a potential conspiracy. The evidence is being analysed by the Investigatory Powers Tribunal.
The unprecedented case against the Metropolitan Police will involve a rare public sitting at the High Court of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal, the body that hears claims of malpractice in relation to monitoring and surveillance. The tribunal considers complaints about the way public authorities use covert techniques.
In the claim, the Sun's parent News Group Newspapers, the paper's political editor Tom Newton Dunn and reporters Anthony France and Craig Woodhouse argue that Scotland Yard chiefs breached their freedom of speech under the European Convention of Human Rights. 'Criminal conspiracy'
Officers were given permission to search records belonging to the three journalists, plus two landlines to the newsdesk. In September 2012, Mr Mitchell had a row with an officer who would not let him wheel his bike through the main gate at Downing Street.
Calls scrutinised Details were leaked to the Sun which reported Mr Mitchell had called officers plebs, which he continues to deny. PC Toby Rowland, the officer who was shouted at by the MP, stands by his account.
Police can ask superiors for permission to search phone records under a key 2000 law. The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act was designed to oversee and control how crime and security agencies secretly access data in the pursuit of serious criminals or terrorists. Detectives also use it in the hunt for missing people and it can be deployed by other public bodies. In the opening session of the unique challenge, a senior detective said he had legal justification to obtain call data from journalists' phones and two newsdesk landlines.
But in its legal challenge, the newspaper will argue that the force's actions amounted to "coercive legal powers by the state", because journalistic sources have special protection in a democratic society. The officer used the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (Ripa), a law used to covertly obtain phone data in a wide range of situations, including crime, terrorism and missing people.
In a preparatory hearing, the tribunal has already heard that police looked at a week's worth of phone records in an effort to uncover the officer who told the newspaper Mr Mitchell had called police "plebs". Police must prove to superiors that using the power was necessary and proportionate.
The dispute occurred when Mr Mitchell was stopped from cycling through Downing Street's gates. Det Ch Insp Tim Neligan, the senior investigating officer in the case, said he was confronted with allegations that looked like a "criminal conspiracy to unseat a cabinet minister".
The Tory MP, who was the government's chief whip at the time, admits swearing during the incident but denies it was directed at the officers or that he called them plebs - a claim he maintains to this day. "He [Andrew Mitchell] was quite emphatic that he was a victim of a fit-up by the police," Det Ch Insp Neligan said.
In November last year Mr Mitchell lost a High Court libel action against the Sun's publishers after a judge ruled he probably had called the officers "plebs". "It was now a crime investigation. We were investigating whether officers [at the Downing Street gate] had lied… and conspired with each other to leak (their account) to the press," said the detective.
The records obtained by the police included mobile phone data showing the whereabouts of the three reporters. "We were under some considerable pressure to find answers to that."
A panel of five, including two High Court judges, will hear the newspaper's claim over two days. 'Lawfully overridden'
Officers involved in the decision-making, including two detective superintendents, are expected to give evidence justifying the operation. The Sun's parent News Group Newspapers, the paper's political editor Tom Newton Dunn and reporters Anthony France and Craig Woodhouse all argue Scotland Yard chiefs breached their freedom of speech under the European Convention on Human Rights.
In written submissions, Gavin Millar QC, for the Sun, said police should have gone to court or, alternatively, asked the newspaper to assist in other ways short of revealing its source.
"Until the last few years… a judge would always take any decision as to whether the journalistic right could lawfully be overridden in order to identify a confidential journalistic source," said Mr Millar.
"This important requirement was disregarded in the present case.
"In each complaint there is an obvious violation of the source right for any number of obvious reasons. The manifest incompatibility of the actions taken by the police with the complainants' [human rights] should be declared."
Det Ch Insp Neligan said he stood by his decision.
"I would not have applied for that data if I did not need it as an investigator," he said.
The hearing, which is due to end on Tuesday, continues.