Home > yourrights > privacy/surveillance and undercover human intelligence sources > surveillance and undercover human intelligence sources
> Surveillance and Undercover Human Intelligent Sources
Surveillance and Undercover Human Intelligence Sources
The use of intrusive or directed surveillance, or covert intelligence sources, by public bodies is regulated under Part II of RIPA. This covers a wide rainge of surveillance activity, from covertly following a person or watching a person, placing secret listening or filming devices near him, or using informants to obtain information about him.
It is important to note that unlike the position for interception of communications, surveillance which is unauthorised under RIPA will not automatically be an offence or amount to a civil wrong. Accordingly, unless a civil wrong takes place within an established cause of action - such as where trespass to property has occurred - then the only action available for unauthorised surveillance will be a claim under the HRA that the public authority in question had failed to act compatibly with your rights under Article 8 of the Convention in carrying out the surveillance. In other words, no crime is necessarily committed if a person is followed, or secretely filmed or a listening device is placed in near him without authorisation.
Part II of RIPA divides surveillance techniques requiring authorisation into three categories: directed surveillance; intrusive surveillance; and the use and conduct of covert human intelligence sources (CHIS). In all categories, the term ‘covert’ refers to behaviour calculated to ensure people subject to surveillance are unaware that it is or may be taking place. All three types of surveillance require different types of authorisation. Directed surveillance and use of covert human intelligence sources can be authorised on grounds wider than those for authorising interception of communications.
It is important to note that unlike the position for interception of communications, surveillance which is unauthorised under RIPA will not automatically be an offence or amount to a civil wrong. Accordingly, unless a civil wrong takes place within an established cause of action - such as where trespass to property has occurred - then the only action available for unauthorised surveillance will be a claim under the HRA that the public authority in question had failed to act compatibly with your rights under Article 8 of the Convention in carrying out the surveillance. In other words, no crime is necessarily committed if a person is followed, or secretely filmed or a listening device is placed in near him without authorisation.
Part II of RIPA divides surveillance techniques requiring authorisation into three categories: directed surveillance; intrusive surveillance; and the use and conduct of covert human intelligence sources (CHIS). In all categories, the term ‘covert’ refers to behaviour calculated to ensure people subject to surveillance are unaware that it is or may be taking place. All three types of surveillance require different types of authorisation. Directed surveillance and use of covert human intelligence sources can be authorised on grounds wider than those for authorising interception of communications.
