Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill — Clause 1 — Authorisation of Criminal Conduct — Exclusions — 27 Jan 2021 at 18:15
The majority of MPs voted against restricting the scope of authorisations for criminal conduct by undercover officers and covert sources to exclude activities including causing death or bodily harm, violating the sexual integrity of an individual, obstructing justice, wrongful detention and torture.
MPs were considering the Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill.[1][2]
The motion supported by the majority of MPs in this vote was:
- That this House disagrees with Lords amendment 2.
Lords amendment 2[3] stated:
- Page 3, line 2, at end insert—
- “(8A) A criminal conduct authorisation may not authorise any criminal conduct—
- (a) intentionally causing death or grievous bodily harm to an individual or being reckless as to whether such harm is caused;
- (b) involving an attempt in any manner to obstruct or pervert the course of justice;
- (c) amounting to an offence under the Sexual Offences Act 2003, the Sexual Offences (Scotland) Act 2009 or any offence listed in Schedule 3 to the Sexual Offences Act 2003;
- (d) subjecting an individual to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, within the meaning of Article 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 1 to the Human Rights Act 1998; or
- (e) depriving a person of their liberty, within the meaning of Article 5 of Part 1 of Schedule 1 to the Human Rights Act 1998.”
The rejected amendment would have impacted Clause 1 of the Bill[4] which provided for a new section of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 titled Covert human intelligence sources: criminal conduct authorisations. The section provided for authorisation for criminal conduct in the course of, or otherwise in connection with, the conduct of a covert human intelligence source. The rejected amendment sought to prevent undercover officers and covert sources being permitted to cause death, commit grievous bodily harm, torture, wrongfully arrest, rape or sexually assault.
--
- [1] Parliament's webpage on the Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill, Parliament.uk
- [2] Explanatory notes to the Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill, 21 January 2020, Parliament.uk
- [3] Lords amendments to the Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill, 21 January 2020, Parliament.uk
- [4] Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill, as introduced in the House of Lords, Parliament.uk
Party Summary
Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.
What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.
What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.
What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.
| Party | Majority (Aye) | Minority (No) | Both | Turnout |
| Alliance | 0 | 1 | 0 | 100.0% |
| Con | 354 (+2 tell) | 2 | 0 | 98.1% |
| DUP | 8 | 0 | 0 | 100.0% |
| Green | 0 | 1 | 0 | 100.0% |
| Independent | 0 | 4 | 0 | 100.0% |
| Lab | 0 | 196 (+2 tell) | 0 | 99.0% |
| LDem | 0 | 11 | 0 | 100.0% |
| PC | 0 | 3 | 0 | 100.0% |
| SDLP | 0 | 2 | 0 | 100.0% |
| SNP | 0 | 47 | 0 | 100.0% |
| Total: | 362 | 267 | 0 | 98.6% |
Rebel Voters - sorted by party
MPs for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party. You can see all votes in this division, or every eligible MP who could have voted in this division
Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote
| Name | Constituency | Party | Vote |
| David Davis | Haltemprice and Howden | Con | no |
| Dame Cheryl Gillan | Chesham and Amersham | Con (front bench) | no |