A tribunal in London exposed the purported biyearly surveillance of Northern Irish journalists perceived as ‘disruptive’ by the local police to monitor possible communication with officers. This surveillance from the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) was presented in an Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT) meeting as the modus operandi against the press, a policy described as ‘Orwellian’.
The information came to light during an ongoing case examining allegations by two investigative reporters in Northern Ireland who believe they were subjected to clandestine surveillance by the PSNI, which may have extended to other journalists in the region.
In 2018, investigative journalists Barry McCaffrey and Trevor Birney were arrested in a controversial move linked to a police investigation into the alleged leak of a classified document featured in their documentary on a conflict-era massacre. The PSNI subsequently extended an unreserved apology for their treatment of McCaffrey and Birney, conceding to pay £875,000 in damages to them and their film company.
In the following year, the two journalists appealed to the IPT to investigate potential unlawful monitoring. With reference to the leaked document from the Police Ombudsman of Northern Ireland that surfaced in their documentary on the 1994 Loughinisland massacre, the PSNI passed the investigation to Durham Constabulary.
In preparation for a substantial hearing due in October, 600 pages of new evidence were disclosed to the IPT last week. Included in these papers was a record of a meeting between two detective sergeants from the PSNI’s intelligence wing and a senior investigating officer from Durham, Darren Ellis.
Ben Jaffey KC, representing McCaffrey, disclosed a note documenting what the PSNI dubbed a ‘defensive operation’ against regional journalists. He informed the tribunal that this appears to suggest certain Northern Irish journalists who penned articles critical towards the PSNI were being crosschecked with police telephone records every half a year.
The lawyer highlighted that the operation was undeniably operational in 2017 according to the document. However, he noted the lack of clarity concerning its inception, conclusion, and what it entailed. Mr Jaffey, the barrister, disclosed that there was still no feedback to materials revealed by Durham Constabulary by the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI).
The lawyer expressed his disapproval if the operation involved acts such as the unlawful collection of data from problematic journalists, biannual review of their bills, correlation with police telephone number lists, and seeking information on new police sources. He termed it as a misleading operation which was alarming in essence.
He informed that the PSNI and related parties were expected to address the issues before the next review hearing in July. Following the adjournment at the Royal Courts of Justice in London, Mr Birney claimed that it was evident the PSNI was overly engaged with journalists and their connections.
He criticised the PSNI’s lack of openness to the court, alleging that they have been reluctantly brought to the court, a scenario that continues for five years. Adding onto the comments was Mr McCaffrey, who stated that the underhanded tactics presumed to be abolished post the Belfast or Good Friday Agreement were still thriving, and could not continue to operate.