| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Lloyd of Berwick had given notice of his intention to move Amendment No. 79:
"INTERCEPTION OF COMMUNICATIONS
(1) The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (c. 23) is amended as follows.
(2) In section 5(3)(b) for the words "or detecting" substitute "detecting or prosecuting".
25 Jan 2006 : Column 1240
(3) In section 17(1) after the words "Subject to section 18" insert "and section 18A".
(4) After section 18 insert—
"18A EVIDENCE
(1) Notwithstanding section 17, evidence of—
(a) the contents of an intercepted communication, and
(b) communications data,
shall be admissible in criminal proceedings to which this section applies.
(2) This section applies to—
(a) proceedings in respect of serious crime;
(b) proceedings in respect of an offence or offences relating to terrorism.
(3) An application for permission to introduce such evidence may be made by the prosecution for the purposes of conducting a criminal prosecution to which this section applies, and not otherwise.
(4) Unless and until an application has been made by the prosecution in any such proceedings, the provisions of section 17 shall continue to apply in connection with those proceedings.
(5) In deciding whether to admit evidence under this section, the court shall take account of all relevant considerations, including in particular—
(a) any application by the Secretary of State to withhold the evidence or part of the evidence on the grounds that its disclosure, or the disclosure of facts relating to the obtaining of the evidence, would be contrary to the public interest, and
(b) any submission that the evidence was obtained unlawfully.""
The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, at Second Reading and in Committee, we were told that the Government were considering the interception of communications and whether such evidence should be admissible. We were also told that their response would be available by the end of 2005. We have not yet had their response. In those circumstances, it does not seem worthwhile arguing the point yet again until we know what the Government think. Therefore, I do not move the amendment now but hope to be able to do so when we consider later in the Session the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005.
Clause 28 [Search, seizure and forfeiture of terrorist publications]:
Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendment No. 80:
Page 28, line 38, leave out "mentioned in subsection (1)(a) to (e)" and insert "falling within subsection (1A)(a) to (e)"
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Lord Thomas of Gresford moved Amendment No. 81:
"COUNTER-TERRORIST POWERS
(1) Part V of the Terrorism Act 2000 (c. 11) (counter-terrorist powers) is amended as follows.
25 Jan 2006 : Column 1241
(2) In section 44 (authorisations)—
(a) in subsection (3), for the words after "if" to the end, substitute "the person giving it reasonably considers it to be necessary for the prevention of acts of terrorism";
(b) after subsection (3) insert—
"(3A) The area or place specified in the authorisation may not be greater in extent than is necessary for the purposes of the authorisation."
(3) In section 46 (duration of authorisations)—
(a) in subsection (3), after "practicable" insert "and in any event within 24 hours";
(b) for subsection (7) substitute—
"(7) An authorisation may be renewed on one occasion only by order of a circuit judge on application by the person who gave it or by a person who could have given it.";
(c) after subsection (7) insert—
"(8) If satisfied that it is necessary for the prevention of acts of terrorism, a circuit judge may make an order under subsection (7) for a period not exceeding three months and may by such order vary the extent of the area or place specified in the authorisation."
(4) After section 46 insert—
"46A PUBLICITY
The Secretary of State shall publicise without delay and in such manner as he considers appropriate, the confirmation, cancellation or renewal of an authorisation under sections 44 and 46.""
The noble Lord said: My Lords, in moving the amendment, I do not propose to put it to the House at this stage. It builds upon the attempt by the noble Baroness, Lady Kennedy of The Shaws, to put some limits on the power of the police to stop and search under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000. The purpose of the amendment is to ensure that the powers can be granted only where it is reasonably considered to be necessary and that the area or place specified in the authorisation may not be greater in extent than is necessary—in Committee, we heard that the whole of the Metropolitan Police area was said to be designated as a place where stop and search can occur. Finally, we seek to have some control by a circuit judge of the procedure and publication of the confirmation, cancellation or renewal of an authorisation that has been made under Sections 44 and 46. The amendment builds on the amendment of the noble Baroness, Lady Kennedy. It is subject to discussions with other parties. I do not propose to take the matter further today.
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Thomas of Gresford, for indicating that he does not intend to pursue the issue. I do not know whether he would find it helpful if I were further to explain why we think that
25 Jan 2006 : Column 1242
Section 44 of the Terrorism Act is well used at present or whether he would think that that was an unnecessary encumbrance on the House.
Lord Thomas of Gresford: My Lords, I am sure with a very thinly attended House it would be an unnecessary encumbrance.
Lord Kingsland: My Lords, before the Minister responds to the degree she feels appropriate in the circumstances, perhaps I may ask the noble Lord whether this is a matter to which he will return at Third Reading.
Lord Thomas of Gresford: My Lords, I fully intend to do so, yes. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 33 [Disclosure notices for the purposes of terrorist investigations]:
Lord Bassam of Brighton moved Amendment No. 82:
The noble Lord said: My Lords, the amendment is straightforward. It seeks to replicate amendments in Clause 37(1) of the Terrorism Bill which amend the definition of a terrorist investigation in the Terrorism Act 2000. Clause 37(1) amends the definition of a terrorist investigation in Section 32 of the Terrorism Act to include investigations both under that Act and under this Bill. Section 32 of the Terrorism Act 2000 defines a terrorist investigation and confers certain powers on those conducting terrorist investigations such as the power to establish and exclude people from cordons. I am sure that noble Lords will agree that these powers should also apply to most of the new offences in Part 1 of the Bill. However, there is no need for the offences created by Clauses 1 and 2 of the Bill to attract these powers. To put it simply, the police are unlikely to need to establish a cordon to deal with the alleged case of encouraging terrorism.
Clause 37(1) excludes from the definition of terrorist investigation any investigations conducted in relation to Clauses 1 and 2 of the Bill. Accepting that principle, this amendment ensures that this exclusion also applies to the corresponding definition of terrorist investigations in Section 60(7) of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 as inserted by Clause 33(2). The amendment ensures consistency. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
7 pm
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |