Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000
Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.
Change 1
38 Appeals against decisions by Judicial Commissioners .
(1) Any senior authorising officer may appeal to the Investigatory Powers Commissioner against any of the following— (a) any refusal of a Judicial Commissioner (other than the Investigatory Powers Commissioner) to approve an authorisation for the carrying out of intrusive surveillance; (b) any decision of such a Commissioner to quash or cancel such an authorisation; (c) any decision of such a Commissioner to make an order under section 37 for the destruction of records. (2) In the case of an authorisation granted by the designated deputy of a senior authorising office or by a person who for the purposes of section 34 is entitled to act for a senior authorising officer, that designated deputy or person shall also be entitled to appeal under this section. (3) An appeal under this section must be brought within the period of seven days beginning with the day on which the refusal or decision appealed against is reported to the appellant. (4) Subject to subsection (5), the Investigatory Powers Commissioner , on an appeal under this section, shall allow the appeal if— (a) he is satisfied that there were reasonable grounds for believing that the requirements of section 32(2)(a) and (b) were satisfied in relation to the authorisation at the time in question; and (b) he is not satisfied that the authorisation is one of which notice was given in accordance with section 35(3)(b) without there being any reasonable grounds for believing that the case was one of urgency. (5) If, on an appeal falling within subsection (1)(b), the Investigatory Powers Commissioner — (a) is satisfied that grounds exist which justify the quashing or cancellation under section 37 of the authorisation in question, but (b) considers that the authorisation should have been quashed or cancelled from a different time from that from which it was quashed or cancelled by the Judicial Commissioner against whose decision the appeal is brought, he may modify that Commissioner’s decision to quash or cancel the authorisation, and any related decision for the destruction of records, so as to give effect to the decision under section 37 that he considers should have been made. (6) Where, on an appeal under this section against a decision to quash or cancel an authorisation, the Investigatory Powers Commissioner allows the appeal he shall also quash any related order for the destruction of records relating to information obtained by the authorised conduct. (7) In this section “designated deputy” has the same meaning as in section 34.
38 Appeals against decisions by Judicial Commissioners .
(1) Any senior authorising officer may appeal to the Investigatory Powers Commissioner against any of the following— (a) any refusal of a Judicial Commissioner (other than the Investigatory Powers Commissioner) to approve an authorisation for the carrying out of intrusive surveillance; (b) any decision of such a Commissioner to quash or cancel such an authorisation; (c) any decision of such a Commissioner to make an order under section 37 for the destruction of records. (2) In the case of an authorisation granted by the designated deputy of a senior authorising office or by a person who for the purposes of section 34 is entitled to act for a senior authorising officer, that designated deputy or person shall also be entitled to appeal under this section. (3) An appeal under this section must be brought within the period of seven days beginning with the day on which the refusal or decision appealed against is reported to the appellant. (4) Subject to subsection (5), the Investigatory Powers Commissioner , on an appeal under this section, shall allow the appeal if— (a) he is satisfied that there were reasonable grounds for believing that the requirements of section 32(2)(a) and (b) were satisfied in relation to the authorisation at the time in question; and (b) he is not satisfied that the authorisation is one of which notice was given in accordance with section 35(3)(b) without there being any reasonable grounds for believing that the case was one of urgency. (5) If, on an appeal falling within subsection (1)(b), the Investigatory Powers Commissioner — (a) is satisfied that grounds exist which justify the quashing or cancellation under section 37 of the authorisation in question, but (b) considers that the authorisation should have been quashed or cancelled from a different time from that from which it was quashed or cancelled by the Judicial Commissioner against whose decision the appeal is brought, he may modify that Commissioner’s decision to quash or cancel the authorisation, and any related decision for the destruction of records, so as to give effect to the decision under section 37 that he considers should have been made. (6) Where, on an appeal under this section against a decision to quash or cancel an authorisation, the Investigatory Powers Commissioner allows the appeal he shall also quash any related order for the destruction of records relating to information obtained by the authorised conduct. (7) In this section “designated deputy” has the same meaning as in section 34.
One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".
Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.
A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.
Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.
Sign in to file itThink it through
Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.