*/
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’.
Chair of the Bar Sam Townend KC highlights some of the key achievements at the Bar Council this year
Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management highlights some of the ways you can cut your IHT bill
Rachel Davenport breaks down everything you need to know about AlphaBiolabs’ industry-leading laboratory testing services for legal matters
By Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management sets out the key steps to your dream property
A centre of excellence for youth justice, the Youth Justice Legal Centre provides specialist training, an advice line and a membership programme
By Kem Kemal of Henry Dannell
Mark Neale, Director General of the Bar Standards Board, offers an update on the Equality Rules consultation
Joanna Hardy-Susskind speaks to those walking away from the criminal Bar
Imposing a professional obligation to act in a way that advances equality, diversity and inclusion is the wrong way to achieve this ambition, says Nick Vineall KC
Tom Cosgrove KC looks at the government’s radical planning reform and the opportunities and challenges ahead for practitioners
By Ashley Friday of AlphaBiolabs
