‘Industrial scale’ spying on journalists revealed

More than 4,000 phone communications between journalists were monitored by the Crown Forces over a three-month period, it has emerged.

Details of a huge snooping operation focusing on journalist-to-journalist interactions have emerged as the PSNI spying scandal continues to widen.

The new information has exposed as a lie the PSNI’s claim that the surveillance of journalists was carried out in a bid to uncover malpractice in its own ranks.

The PSNI has admitted making over 800 applications for communications data for journalists and lawyers over a 13-year period from 2011-2024.

Around 4,000 communications, including text messages and the location of calls made were logged.

The surveillance covered the period between July-October 2011 and included 320 journalists, focussing on several well-known award-winning investigative journalists.

It has now emerged that English police were also involved in spying on journalists in Ireland during the period.

The PSNI has said it has expanded a review to look into its spying on journalists, lawyers, non-governmental organisations, the Policing Board and Police Ombudsman.

But one of those affected, investigative journalist Barry McCaffrey, who it is known was under surveillance at various times between 2008-2018, said the latest revelation “shows the absolute need for a public inquiry which has the powers to call serving and retired police officers”.

“We were initially told by chief constable Jon Boucher last year that less than 10 journalists had been spied on and that it was only carried out to catch PSNI whistle-blower and dodgy police officers, that number then increased to 320 journalists now it’s 4,000 texts and phone calls belong to 12 journalists.

“Where does this stop?”

Mr McCaffrey said it is unknown how far the snooping scandal extends.

“We do not know if this spying against the media was taking place across the UK,” he said.

“Only a full public inquiry can find out the whole truth. If the police have nothing to hide then how can they block a public inquiry.”

Niall Murphy, of KRW Law, who is represents Mr McCaffrey said the “industrial scale” the surveillance is “terrifying”.

“What is also frightening, is the material which has been withheld on the basis that it is so sensitive,” he said.

Mr Murphy said members of the media should be concerned.

“Every journalist working in this jurisdiction should be appalled and concerned as to whether they also have been a victim of this routine harvesting of protected confidential information and I encourage anyone who reposes such concerns to engage immediately with the Angus McCullough Review,” he said.

Urgent Appeal