Legislation

The Undercover Policing Inquiry (UCPI) is governed by the Inquiries Act 2005 and associated Inquiry Rules 2006. Due to procedural issues that have arisen, the Inquiry has also to consider other laws in the course of its work, particularly relating to people’s rights to anonymity and privacy. These include:

• Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974
• General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) 2018
• The Human Rights Act 1998

For much of the period that the UCPI is investigating, legislation to regulate covert policing did not exist. The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (2000) put a formal legislative framework into place, but this covers only tranches three and four of the Inquiry. Special Branch and the undercover police were supposedly constrained by other laws on policing and data protection. These included:

• Police and Crime Evidence 1984 The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, commonly known as PACE, was a significant updating of police powers following major social concerns around police abuse of powers. Significant parts remain in power to today, though some of it has been updated through other acts such as the 2003 Criminal Justice Act. Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984
• Interception of Communications Act 1985 The Interception of Communications Act provides the basis for granting warrants for phone taps, but made it unlawful for such information to be provided as evidence before the courts. The Interception of Communications Act 1985
• Data Protection Act 1984 The Data Protection Act 1984 was a foundational piece of legislation, governing official and private use of personal information. It was superceded by the 1998 Data Protection Act, and formally repealed in 2000. Data Protection Act 1984
• Data Protection Act 1998 The Data Protection Act 1998 was an updated to the 1984 act of the same name. It was later superseded by the European Union's General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR), which were enacted into UK law in 2018. Data Protection Act 1998
• Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) was a landmark piece of legislation, creating and controlling wide ranging powers by state and local government agencies to carry out investigations. It particularly covered policing and the security services. It remains in force, though it has been updated in some areas by subsequent legislation such as the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000
• Criminal Justice Act 2003 The Criminal Justice Act 2003 updated police powers from what had been previously established under the 1984 Police And Criminal Act (PACE), such as bail and stop and search powers. It built on the regime that had been established under PACE, leaving large parts intact. Criminal Justice Act 2003

It is important to note that many of these laws would have been amended over the time since they were enacted, or supplemented by later legislation or statutory instruments. 

Later laws such as the 2016 Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act post-date much of the period under investigation by the Inquiry. Current legislation comes under scrutiny at the end of the Inquiry, when the Chair, having heard all the evidence, presents his findings. These may press the UK government to replace or amend existing laws to prevent undercover police abusing their powers and members of the public. 

Fuller discussion of the legislation that impacts the legal framework on undercover policing has been set out in Statements by various parties, including: 

• National Police Chiefs Council
• Designated lawyers
• Category H NSCPs
• Counsel to the Inquiry

An issue the Inquiry has been asked to consider is the lawfulness of undercovers entering private residences. Or whether this amounted to trespass. Charlotte Kilroy KC developed this point in the Tranche One Closing Statement on behalf of the Category H women deceived into relationships. She noted that officers did this without the warrant they would normally have required to enter a private home. Sir John Mitting addressed this to a small degree in his Interim Report, noting that: “At the very least, the particular defences open to a police officer on public-interest grounds would have had to have been considered” by police managers.