7

Assume an offender has committed a crime in England. I was curious as to when Military Intelligence section 5 (MI5) would be able to claim jurisdiction over the case?

When searching the internet, I have found descriptions (see below) which make it appear that MI5 only takeover the types of criminal cases seen in movies.

"Our role is defined in law by the Security Service Act 1989. This limits our responsibility to protecting the UK against threats to national security. The law also prohibits us from acting to further the interests of any political party."

However, having researched online, the above is very misleading. I have seen a simple shooting automatically get transferred from the police onto MI5. This was because more than (I think) 5 bullets had been fired at the scene. It was a normal gangland style shooting, not anything spectacular.

Let me repeat the question: When can MI5 claim jurisdiction over a police criminal case?

Vorbis
  • 313
  • 1
  • 5
user5623335
  • 1,374
  • 2
  • 14
  • 34

1 Answers1

14

The answer to your question depends on whether you are referring to an example where MI5 (officially known as the Security Service) actually took over from the police or if they worked alongside the police. Journalists often blur the distinction between those two and it isn't always straightforward to identify.

I will begin by setting out the law in the event that MI5 play a supporting role alongside the police.

MI5 must use one of two tests set out in RIPA 2000

You are right. Limiting their jurisdiction to "national security" is too narrow. According to s1(4) of the Security Service Act 1989 (see my emphasis in bold):

It shall also be the function of the Service to act in support of the activities of police forces ... in the prevention and detection of serious crime.

This leaves the question of what constitutes a serious crime open. However, s1(5) tells us that the relevant terminology is defined in s81 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000.

In particular, s81(2)(b) states that:

references to serious crime are references to crime that satisfies the test in subsection (3)(a) or (b).

Referring to those sections:

Those tests are—

(a) that the offence or one of the offences that is or would be constituted by the conduct is an offence for which a person who has attained the age of twenty-one and has no previous convictions could reasonably be expected to be sentenced to imprisonment for a term of three years or more;

(b)that the conduct involves the use of violence, results in substantial financial gain or is conduct by a large number of persons in pursuit of a common purpose.

The "5 bullet rule" you refer to in the question is not mentioned. However, the conduct you describe could (in the presence of more facts) satisfy either of these tests.

However, in the case of a complete takeover from the police ...

There is still an important point to make regarding national security. According to s1(2) of the Security Service Act 1989:

The function of the Service shall be the protection of national security and, in particular, its protection against threats from espionage, terrorism and sabotage, from the activities of agents of foreign powers and from actions intended to overthrow or undermine parliamentary democracy by political, industrial or violent means.

This section of the act defines the primary function of MI5, allowing discretion for both supporting the police (as above) and taking control. This presents much narrower grounds for when they can take over a case. While the example you give could conceivably (again, with more facts) be covered by this, I suspect it likely falls into the above section where MI5 worked alongside the police.

FD_bfa
  • 6,468
  • 1
  • 21
  • 80