Crime Solicitors

Intercepting someone else’s telephone calls is a criminal rather than a civil offence and can result in the imposition of a fine, a prison sentence of up to two years or both. There may also be civil actions involved in phone hacking cases, so the victims are able to sue the hacker for damages.

The law governing phone hacking is not absolutely clear, however and in light of a recent scandal involving elements of the press and individuals in the public eye, there have been calls for it to be considerably tightened up or at least for greater clarity. In particular, the interception of ‘celebrities’ voicemail messages by the News of the World newspaper, owned by News International, has had the effect of shining a spotlight on the working practices and ethical standards of a number of private detectives and journalists working for the paper.

The unauthorised interception of communications, which is covered by the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, includes the interception of texts, emails, pager messages and fixed and mobile telephone lines. According to this piece of legislation, the interception or ‘hacking’ of a communication by some third party, which results in all or part of the content being made available, at the time of transmission, to that party, who was neither the intended recipient nor the sender, is an offence.

In 2006 there was a major conviction, which used this act, the first of its kind, when two journalists were found guilty of allegedly putting members of the Royal Family under surveillance. The pair were given prison sentences.

Formerly, the police interpreted the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 as covering the interception of voicemail messages, only if they had not yet been listened to by the intended recipient; this situation is now palpably changing. Prosecutors in hacking cases are increasingly arguing that it is an offence to intercept voicemail messages, whether they have been listened to or not.

The type of celebrity phone hacking that has been witnessed in recent times is in a different category to the type that might involve state security. Unlike many similar civil claims and offences, public interest is not a possible defence that can be brought on the side of the hacker. Only the security services and the police are authorised to apply for permission to intercept messages and telephone conversations.

It is now argued, in many quarters, that the legislation concerned with phone hacking is outdated and needs modernising because contemporary problems require a contemporary solution. There is also a need for greater clarity, because even with the legislation as it stands, police and prosecutors argue about the meaning of particular sections in the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. Changes to the legislation to remove such causes of dissent are called for in order to ensure that systematic invasions of privacy become a thing of the past.

Contact crime solicitors such as Duncan Lewis for more information on the legislation covering phone hacking and other breaches of privacy.