So far my title i am going for is ‘Intelligence services and the immunity they get, is it justified?’
My supervisor said that i should focus on more of a specific case like terrorism, so the title would change to ‘Intelligence services and the immunity they get, is it justified to counter terrorism?’. However, i was more thinking to make it more specific in the tile and not limit myself to talking about one outcome, so i will say the title could change to – ‘Intelligence services and the immunity they get, is it justified to protect national security’.
The problem im having is trying to gather loads of data that is contextual to the matter, i can go into other countries like the USA, however, that becomes a dangerous game of misinterpreting work as their legislation and politics is different to the UK, although i guess i could always link it to the Edward Snowden case and the 5 eyes when looking at America etc.
I was wondering if anyone could help with further information about the justification of immunity the intelligence services get and any cases that have been to court about it.
I’ve looked into the ‘Intelligence services act 1994’ that gave me some real good fundamentals of why the intelligence service was created and the first time parliament has taken any responsibility for the acts of the UK intelligence/secret service. I would be very grateful if someone could help with some up to date legislation or point me in the direction of them!