Vincent Kearney, the former BBC Northern Ireland home affairs correspondent, received £20,000 in damages after a tribunal ruled that police and MI5 unlawfully accessed his mobile phone data over several years. The Investigatory Powers Tribunal determined the agencies violated his rights under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which safeguards press freedom and the confidentiality of sources.
Applications failed to meet legal standards
The tribunal’s judgment outlined multiple instances where authorities requested Kearney’s communications data without following the stricter legal requirements for journalists. In 2006, shortly after he began his role, MI5 applied for his data under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act but did not mention his profession or the intent to identify his sources.
Three years later, MI5 submitted another request, this time acknowledging Kearney as a journalist but omitting the “overriding requirement in the public interest” standard needed to justify the interference. That same year, the Police Service of Northern Ireland sought data to identify a caller who claimed responsibility for the murder of PC Stephen Carroll. The application also failed to note the higher threshold for accessing a reporter’s communications.
Additional requests followed. In 2011, after Kearney produced a documentary alleging failures in the Office of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, the PSNI obtained GPS data from his phone over four months. The request did not mention his status as a journalist. Durham Constabulary later used data from the same authorization in a separate investigation into police collusion in the Loughinisland massacre.
Related: Scottish government seeks views on child online safety
Tribunal cites “vital public watchdog role of the press”
The ruling highlighted the importance of protecting journalistic sources, referencing the 1996 European Court of Human Rights case Goodwin v UK. That decision established source confidentiality as “one of the basic conditions for press freedom” and required interference to be justified by an “overriding requirement in the public interest.”
The tribunal stated that if authorities cannot show no other methods exist to achieve their objective, any measure interfering with sources is likely disproportionate. It added that some objectives, such as identifying a disloyal employee, do not outweigh the public interest in source protection.
All six instances of interference were deemed neither lawful nor proportionate. The tribunal noted these violations occurred years after the Goodwin ruling, which should have set clear standards.
In awarding damages, the tribunal considered the cumulative effect of the breaches. Kearney described how the violations damaged trust between him and his sources. The judgment explained that the protections for journalists exist not for their personal benefit but to ensure the public can receive information.
The £20,000 award was divided equally between the PSNI and MI5. The tribunal referenced domestic and European case law to determine the amount, aligning it with comparable UK awards.
Related: The Best Diamond Ring Sales and Discounts of 2024
Kearney left his position at BBC Northern Ireland in 2019 after 13 years as home affairs correspondent. His case joins a series of legal challenges showing tensions between national security investigations and press freedoms. Similar disputes have emerged in other European countries, where courts have examined state access to journalists’ data, particularly in cases involving leaks or official misconduct.
The decision arrives as governments worldwide address the balance between investigative powers and protections for a free press. In the U.S., federal guidelines require law enforcement to exhaust other methods before seeking a reporter’s records, though enforcement has been inconsistent. The UK’s Investigatory Powers Act, which replaced RIPA in 2016, includes safeguards for journalistic material but has faced criticism for its scope.
The tribunal’s decision does not prevent authorities from requesting communications data in the future. However, it reinforces the need for strict compliance with legal standards when journalists are involved. For Kearney, the award recognizes the personal and professional impact of such surveillance, even when the targets are not suspected of wrongdoing.
A single oversight can erode trust.