Skip to main content

Urgent Investigative Steps

Volume 405: debated on Monday 19 May 2003

The text on this page has been created from Hansard archive content, it may contain typographical errors.

Amendments made: No. 378, in page 48, line 6, leave out from 'investigation' to end of line 23 and insert "if—

  • (a) the action is necessary as a matter of urgency to prevent the investigation being substantially and irrevocably prejudiced,
  • (b) the requirements of subsection (1A) are met, and
  • (c) either—
  • (i) the action is authorised under subsection (1B), or
  • (ii) the requirements of subsection (8) are met.
  • (1A) The requirements of this subsection are met if—'

    No. 379, in page 48, line 28, at end insert—

    (1B) An officer of the rank of superintendent or above may authorise the action if—
  • (a) he is satisfied that new evidence has been obtained which would be relevant to an application under section 64(1) or (2) in respect of the qualifying offence to which the investigation relates, or
  • (b) he has reasonable grounds for believing that such new evidence is likely to be obtained as a result of the investigation.'.
  • No. 380, in page 48, line 29, leave out '(2)' and insert '(1B)'.

    No. 381, in page 48, line 32, at end insert—

    "(8) The requirements of this subsection are met if—
  • (a) there has been no undue delay in applying for authorisation under subsection (1B),
  • (b) that authorisation has not been refused, and
  • (c) taking into account the urgency of the situation, it is not reasonably practicable to obtain that authorisation before taking the action.
  • (9) Where the requirements of subsection (8) are met, the action is nevertheless to be treated as having been unlawful unless, as soon as reasonably practicable after the action is taken, an officer of the rank of superintendent or above certifies in writing that he is satisfied that, when the action was taken—
  • (a) new evidence had been obtained which would be relevant to an application under section 64(1) or (2) in respect of the qualifying offence to which the investigation relates, or
  • (b) the officer who took the action had reasonable grounds for believing that such new evidence was likely to be obtained as a result of the investigation.'.—[Paul Goggins.]