Clarke to allow phone-tap evidence in terrorist cases

Charles Clarke, the Home Secretary, is expected to propose legislation to allow transcripts of phone interceptions to be available to courts for the first time, particularly in cases involving terrorism and serious organised crime.

The move comes after the police changed their stance on the acceptability of phone-tap material, and MI5 and MI6 adopted a more "neutral position" on the use of intercept evidence.

GCHQ, the government signals intelligence centre in Cheltenham, has also made it clear to the Home Secretary that it is not opposed to having transcripts of phone interceptions made available to courts.

The agencies, however, still have some concerns about the use of phone-tap evidence and want strict safeguards included in any new laws.

Home Office sources have also indicated a "softening" within the department as opposition from law enforcers diminishes. Tony Blair is also thought to favour the move.

Britain has a ban on using phone intercept material from intelligence services in the courts, but in America, Australia and countries in the European Union phone taps are commonly used to secure convictions.

The use of phone-tap evidence also has the support of the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and lawyers. Civil rights groups are in favour and argue that the disclosure will make the work of the security services more transparent and accountable.

The police and security services want to ensure that none of their agents or covert techniques are exposed or put under threat.

They also have concerns about how the rules of disclosing evidence to defence lawyers may endanger their investigations if intercept evidence is permitted.

The first evidence that the mood within Britain's security network was changing came last week when Andy Hayman, the terror spokesman for the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) and Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, told MPs that intercept evidence would be useful in the prosecution of certain cases.

"I think I am moving towards - as I know Acpo is - that in a selected number of cases, not only in terrorism but also serious crime, it would be useful," he told the Commons Home Affairs Select Committee.

"It does make us look a little bit foolish that everywhere else in the world is using it to good effect."

A source from the security services said: "In principle we accept that there are benefits, but there are concerns that need to be taken into account and properly addressed."

As well as protecting sources the security agencies have stressed that some intercept evidence is likely to be inadmissible in court because of codewords.

The technology used could also come under scrutiny with lawyers arguing that it is impossible to prove that a phone tap has not been tampered with.

A Whitehall source said: "The idea that phone-tap evidence is going be some kind of panacea that will result in a string of successful prosecutions is fantasy."

Home Office sources said that Mr Clarke was committed to allowing intercept evidence if a watertight way of protecting the security services' sources could be found. But they stressed that finding a robust legal model was extremely difficult.

Not everyone is in favour of a change. Sir Stephen Lander, the former head of MI5 and the first chairman of the Serious Organised Crime Agency, and Sir Swinton Thomas, the interception of communications commissioner, have expressed strong reservations.