Community resourceWorksheet

OCR H446 1.5.1 RIPA powers, purpose and proportionality

Part 3 of 5 · H446 1.5.1 · Computing related legislation

The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 is assessed in OCR H446 1.5.1 as both a source of authorised powers and a source of privacy concerns, so a one-sided answer cannot reach the higher marks. This worksheet builds the whole chain, from an authorised body and a legitimate purpose through to necessity, proportionality and safeguards.

Students will:

  • link an authorised public body and a stated purpose to one specific covert power
  • weigh an investigative benefit against the privacy cost to the people affected
  • judge whether a proposed use is necessary and proportionate, or whether a narrower option exists
  • repair a one-sided response that names a power without a purpose or a limit
  • produce a balanced evaluation of a serious case that includes safeguards

Inside: 6 explanation cells, 1 multiple-choice question, 2 fill-in-the-blanks cells and 3 written answers. 36 marks, about 45 to 60 minutes.

Series: H446 1.5.1 · Computing related legislation, part 3 of 5.

Shared by Coding PathwayVerified teacher

  • 12 cells
  • About 45 minutes
  • CC BY-SA 4.0
  • Shared 31 Aug 2026
  • Updated 3 Sept 2026

Preview

The whole resource, exactly as a class sees it. Answers and marking are held back.

RIPA: powers, purpose and proportionality

OCR assesses the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 as both a source of authorised investigative powers and a source of privacy/freedom concerns. A one-sided ‘safety good’ or ‘surveillance bad’ response misses the examination demand.

Build the complete chain

RIPA power, purpose and proportionality chainauthority is not the same as unlimited powerauthorised bodypublic authoritypurposecrime / safetyspecific powercovert techniquebenefituseful evidenceprivacy costintrusion / errorevaluation checkpoint1 Is the action authorised for this body?2 Is it necessary for the stated purpose?3 Is the intrusion proportionate and safeguarded?A balanced conclusion weighs public benefit against affected rights in this case.

RIPA concerns covert techniques used by specified public authorities. OCR evidence includes interception/monitoring of communications or internet activity, communications data, covert surveillance, access to protected information or keys, and requirements placed on providers. Its purposes include detecting/preventing crime, national security and public safety.

Current-law note checked 28 August 2026: RIPA codes remain in use for specified covert activity; the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 provides much of the broader modern interception/communications-data framework. H446 still names RIPA. Do not turn IPA detail into extra recall unless a question supplies it.

Worked balance: fraudulent permits

A council suspects an organised group is selling fraudulent parking permits. Investigators request communications data for two named accounts after other evidence links them to the scheme.

Benefit: a targeted request may connect accounts, times and participants → supports detection and protects public funds.

Risk: communications data can expose associations and routines of people who may not be guilty → privacy intrusion or collateral information.

Evaluation: the case is stronger if the request is authorised, necessary for the defined investigation, limited to relevant accounts/time and proportionate to the suspected offence.

Multiple choice1 mark

Which is the strongest RIPA evaluation rather than a one-sided assertion?

  • ASurveillance is always acceptable because public bodies use it
  • BRIPA gives every organisation unrestricted access to every message
  • CA targeted, authorised request may help detect serious wrongdoing, but its scope should be necessary and proportionate because communications data affects privacy
  • DPrivacy always prevents investigation
Fill in the blanks4 marks
A strong RIPA answer identifies an authorised gap 1, a legitimate gap 2, a specific gap 3, its public benefit and its gap 4 cost.
  • body
  • purpose
  • power
  • privacy
  • copyright
Written answer9 marks

A public authority wants continuous access to every resident's location history to investigate one disputed waste-collection claim. Evaluate the proposed use of investigatory powers.

Consider purpose, scope, affected people, necessity, proportionality and a narrower alternative.

Students type their answer here.

Three traps

  1. Police only: OCR has credited a wider range of authorised public bodies; avoid memorising a brittle exhaustive list.
  2. Power without purpose: naming interception or a key request does not explain why it is used.
  3. Authority without limit: a legal route still needs authorisation, necessity, proportionality and safeguards.
Written answer6 marks

Repair this response: ‘RIPA lets the police read anything online, which is good because criminals should be caught.’

Keep any defensible core, then add accuracy, scope, privacy and balance.

Students type their answer here.

Apply the model independently

The next tasks change the data, representation or context and reduce the support. Complete them using the method you have just learned, then check the required state or consequence.

Written answer12 marks

Investigators have evidence that a small group is coordinating attacks on emergency communications. They seek access to encrypted messages and related communications data for named accounts. Discuss the benefits, drawbacks and safeguards of the proposed investigation.

Use the supplied risk without assuming every person in the data is guilty. Reach a qualified conclusion.

Students type their answer here.

Fill in the blanks4 marks
RIPA authorises specified covert techniques for defined public checkpoint gap 1. A complete evaluation links a power to its checkpoint gap 2, weighs public benefit against checkpoint gap 3, then tests necessity and checkpoint gap 4.

Return here if a response lists powers but does not explain their purpose, affected people or safeguards.