UK: Third report on MI5
01 March 1993
In his third report as the Security Service (MI5) Commissioner, Lord Justice Stuart-Smith says, again, that he is satisfied with their operations. The warrants issued by the Home Secretary, which empower MI5 to "interfere" with property (ie: to enter, burgle and place bugs or other materials) were examined by the Commissioner as were the warrants that were renewed (para.3). In 1992 a total of 25 complaints were received by the Tribunal and 20 investigations of complaints were completed (see Statewatch, vol 1 no 2). None were substantiated, or in the parlance of the Commissioner: "No determination has been made in favour of the complainant".
He is a bit more forthcoming over the total number of complaints received over the three year period. A total of 102 people complained that inquiries were being made into their activities. In 99 cases the Commissioner says "no such inquiries were made". In the remaining 3 cases either inquiries had been made but had now ceased or the Tribunal concluded: "that the Service has reasonable grounds at that time for deciding to institute or continue inquiries about the complainant" (para.7). A further total of 22 people complained that MI5 had disclosed information about them in the vetting procedure - in only 2 cases had this been done and this was justified because "the Service has reasonable grounds for believing the information to be true" (para.7).
During the year the Tribunal sought the guidance of the Commissioner on the meaning of "making inquiries" - an exercise in tortuous semantics. As the Commissioner reported last year there are three categories of file codes: green when inquiries are being made; amber when inquiries are prohibited but new information may be added to the file; red when inquiries are prohibited as is "any addition of substantive information". The Tribunal however was concerned about information added to the file of Subject A as a result of inquiries into Subject B or an organisation associated with Subject A during the amber period. The Commissioner's advice is that "the mere receipt or recording of information" in Subject A's file as a result of an inquiry into Subject B, did not constitute an "inquiry" into Subject A (para. 9).
Report of the Commissioner for 1992 Security Service Act 1989, Rt Hon Lord Justice Stuart-Smith March 1993 Cm 2174.