Police and MI5 waged campaign of illegal interference against ex-BBC journalist, tribunal told | MI5
Police and MI5 subjected a former BBC reporter to a “long and consistent campaign of unlawful interference” by obtaining communications data from his mobile phone, a court heard.
The surveillance targeted the BBC’s Northern Ireland home affairs correspondent, Vincent Kearney, and took place over an eight-year period as authorities tried to identify his sources.
Details of surveillance by MI5 and police forces in Northern Ireland and England emerged in a case brought by the BBC and Kearney to the investigative powers tribunal (IPT), a special court that investigates complaints against the UK’s spy agencies.
MI5 last year admitted illegally obtaining Kearney’s phone data on two occasions between 2006 and 2009. But in court on Wednesday it was revealed that several police forces had intruded and that the Security Service had been more intrusive and far-reaching.
The IPT heard that the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) and the Metropolitan police also admitted that they unlawfully obtained Kearney’s contact data and breached his rights under the European convention on human rights.
The court heard that in a single operation the PSNI obtained information about 1,580 calls or messages made or received by the journalist. His lawyers said there was evidence to suggest police had at one stage obtained “geographical data” based on phone records.
Jude Bunting KC, the barrister representing the BBC and Kearney, told the court that the police and MI5 confessions “reveal repeated and consistent unlawful acts by numerous public authorities over many years”. “The volume and scope of interference with journalistic material in this case is unprecedented,” he added.
Kearney, now northern editor of Irish broadcaster RTÉ, was a familiar face at BBC Northern Ireland, where he worked until 2019. He covered politics and security for the broadcaster and worked on high-profile police-related stories.
In submissions to the IPT, his lawyers defended communications data obtained by police in various operations between 2009 and 2014. [he] where and when they were interacting.” Contact data does not include the content of calls or messages.
The IPT also heard how the PSNI created a “detailed intelligence profile” of Kearney, which included details about his journalism and private life. This included information about his family members and who he lived with.
After MI5 admitted last year that some of its actions were unlawful, the agency revealed additional information about how it obtained Kearney’s contact data an unspecified number of times in 2006. His official had also made an internal request to “open a file” on the journalist.
A lawyer for MI5 told the court “we fully accept” that the applications to obtain Kearney’s data were unlawful, but told the agency’s actions did not amount to a “long and sustained campaign”.
In a statement to the court, Kearney said the confessions by MI5 and the police force “revealed a systematic and years-long pattern of access to my newspaper sources”. He added: “I am not aware of any other journalist in the UK or Ireland who has been targeted so consistently over so many years.”
Kearney’s lawyers argued that the trespass had a “measurable chilling effect” on his ability to work as a journalist and “damaged and in some cases destroyed” his relationships with sources. “Their source relationships with their BBC colleagues have also been damaged,” they said.
A spokesman for the BBC said: “What happened in this incident was wrong and must never be repeated. The independence of what we do is hard-won and it is something we will fight to protect.”
Kearney is seeking compensation from the PSNI. The force argued that compensation was not appropriate in this case. His lawyers said efforts to obtain the journalist’s data were “reasonable” and aimed at “further criminal investigation.”
A Home Office spokesman said the case “involved historical activity” and that legislation governing the acquisition of communications data had been updated to include enhanced protections for journalists and journalistic material.
