<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 08/08/2012 11:49 AM, Charles Lindsey
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:op.wipuv91k6hl8nm@clerew.man.ac.uk"
type="cite">On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 20:50:36 +0100, Peter Fairbrother
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:zenadsl6186@zen.co.uk"><zenadsl6186@zen.co.uk></a> wrote:
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">RIPA S.5(6): The conduct authorised by an
interception warrant shall be taken to include—
<br>
<br>
(a) all such conduct (including the interception of
communications not identified by the warrant) as it is necessary
to undertake in order to do what is expressly authorised or
required by the warrant;
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Which is irrelevant to the case in question, which was concerned
with interception *without* a warrant.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I thought we were discussing the case of intercepting "external" vs.
"internal" both of which require warrants (as opposed to stuff
originating and finishing outside UK which requires no warrant at
all - like all other countries AFAIK)<br>
<br>
External stuff requires "certificated" warrants, and the Bassam
letter and associated FIPR notes at
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.fipr.org/rip/#Overlapping">http://www.fipr.org/rip/#Overlapping</a> are all about how the wiggle
room applies viz. (****)<br>
<br>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><<How do 8(3) and 15(3) interlock with
clause 5(6)?<o:p>
</o:p>
</i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Clause 5(6) allows, under the authority of an
interception
warrant, all such conduct as it is necessary to undertake in order
to do what
the warrant expressly authorises. This conduct can include the
interception of
communications - whether external or internal - not identified by
the warrant.
But such interception must be the minimum necessary to achieve the
object of the
warrant, and must be proportionate to that object. ***** The
clause applies equally to
warrants complying with clause 8(1) and (3) *****. In the latter
case it could, for
example, make lawful the interception of internal communications
where these
mixed with external communications on a trunk used mainly for
external purposes.
Communications that originate and are received in the UK are
always
"internal"; as is well known, some of these will go abroad en
route
and so be carried on primarily external trunks. It is not possible
to intercept
the external communications on the trunk without intercepting the
internal
communications as well.>><br>
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Caspar<br>
</p>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>