Under 18s and the Official Secrets Act

[charliegolf]

Before the Trident thread appeared here I was arguing the toss about it with others on another thread. Someone has suggested that 16-18 year olds in the Forces could not be held to the terms of the OSA because of their age. Is this true? If yes, do boy entrants 're-sign' the Act at 18? (And girls of course.)

Ta.

CG

[jonw66]

I had a job at the tax office before I joined up and I had to sign it at 17 if that helps

[NutLoose]

I signed it at 16 I think as part of my joining up, I was attested at the CIO and did all of the paperwork before I left.

[Roadster280]

Well, criminal responsibility starts at the age of 10, and everyone is bound by the OSA whether or not they've signed the certificate. In fact I'm fairly certain the only purpose of the certificate is to make it harder for one to claim ignorance as a mitigating circumstance if convicted of an OSA offence.


That's my understanding too. It reminds the person signing of their obligations, but not a lot else, since they are already under said obligation.

[Skeleton]

I signed it at 17 years and 5 months old if that helps, and it was in the CIO.

[charliegolf]

Thanks all- I had overlooked the logic that a law is a law whether 'signed' or not.

CG

[Pontius Navigator]

I have signed several times, the last when I took a job with the CS. When I retired they sent a pack and a new form. I didn't bother to return it and they never chased me either.

[Herod]

During WWII Alan Turing joined Dad's Army. After a while he became bored and stopped attending. He was reminded that he had signed a form in which was the question "are you aware that you will be subject to military discipline?". Turing pointed out that he had written "no" as the answer. Not a lot you can say after that.

[muppetofthenorth]

I did work experience at RAF Leeming when I was 15/16, I was asked to sign it then.

[tucumseh]

I signed it at 16 and again at 18. The main difference was the contract that existed between me and MoD. Under 18 it is with your parents/guardian and you sign the OSA in their presence. Over 18, you're on your own. Not sure if that has changed over the years. The rules are so vague this was probably one man's interpretation at the time.

An interesting piece of legislation that is very out of date and very difficult to implement. I've submitted quite a few written pieces to MoD in recent years asking permission to make public, each time expecting more redactions than approvals. The only time they said no was a reference I wanted to make to a short internal report - that I should seek it under FoI so they could redact first. When it was asked for, they denied its existence, which meant I could refer to it anyway. Bizarre.

[condor17]

Had to sign the OSA at age 16 to enable me to do a Christmas post round , delivering The Queen's Mail ; whilst still a school boy .

rgds condor .

[4Greens]

Never had to sign it for the RN at 16 . Maybe it didnt exist in the fifties. Come to think of it we never had ID cards either.

[Wander00]

slight thread drift, but surprised people are saying OSA will inhibit people from giving evidence to the child abuse enquiries. Surely (and I don't have the Act to hand and I am not a lawyer) there must be a caveat in the act for due legal process. (or maybe it is "convenient" to claim there isn't)

[Heathrow Harry]

problem is that the OSA is seen as pretty draconian - and in the past it has been (mis-) used on all sorts of small misdemeanours

I'm sure you'll still get a jury to convict on a spying case or similar but in the age of facebook, Twitter and 24 hr rolling news the basic mindset of the Great British Public is generally in favour of disclosure

[Melchett01]

...surprised people are saying OSA will inhibit people from giving evidence to the child abuse enquiries. Surely (and I don't have the Act to hand and I am not a lawyer) there must be a caveat in the act for due legal process. (or maybe it is "convenient" to claim there isn't)

To my simple mind, the only people who might argue that are those that think the OSA is there to protect officials rather than secrets. And they would only think that if they had something to hide.

[Fitter2]

I signed it at 16 and again at 18. The main difference was the contract that existed between me and MoD. Under 18 it is with your parents/guardian and you sign the OSA in their presence. Over 18, you're on your own. Not sure if that has changed over the years. The rules are so vague this was probably one man's interpretation at the time

In 1960 I signed on my own behalf on induction to the RAF at Cardington, after swearing allegiance to HM. I was happy to sign anything that allowed me to play with aircraft.

[baffman]

The Official Secrets Act (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1989/6) isn't as out-of-date as all that, the current version having been enacted in 1989. Internet or no internet, it still makes sense for criminal sanctions to be available for genuinely serious breaches. Although it is fairly unlikely that any under-18 would have access to the types of sensitive information protected by the Act, as others have said there is no special exemption for that agegroup.

[Mogwi]

Never asked to sign it despite being cleared to TS and CTS as well as being i/c things which generated EMC. Perhaps I just have an honest face!

[ian16th]

I entered the RAF as a 15 year old Boy Entrant, I don't remember signing it until my demob interview, just before my 28th birthday!

[Robert Cooper]

Like you Ian, I joined as an Apprentice at the age of 15 and was overseas by the time I was 18. Don't recall having to sign an OSA until I retired.

Bob C

[Haraka]

The Official Secrets Acts ( note the plural) are incorporated into U.K. legislation. "Signing " them is just an admission that you are aware of the implications, since you are ( if a U.K. citizen) subject to them in any event. Not having signed them is no defence in the event of their violation.
Whilst we are on the topic of such legislation, the "right of the press not to disclose it's sources" is another myth that has no standing in law.

[Whenurhappy]

There is the so-called 'public interest defence', ie whistle-blowing. That was initially considered by that rather odious harridan of a fish-wife, Bettina Jordan-Barber, the civil servant who was recently released from prison after being convicted of corruption in public office - accepting over £100,000 from News International to sell stories from the MOD. Interestingly, she wasn't charged with offences under the OSA.

She pleaded guilty but claims that her only mistake 'was to accept money'. Yes, well, having money wired to a Thomas Cook Office and picking it up whilst wearing a disguise.

Read and feel sick:

Bettina Jordan-Barber: The ex MoD strategist who went to jail after telling The Sun about military shortages - and taking money for it - Crime - UK - The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/bettina-jordanbarber-the-ex-mod-strategist-who-went-to-jail-after-telling-the-sun-about-military-shortages--and-taking-money-for-it-10302429.html)

PS: I'm still awaiting the apology from the Service for being falsely accused of leaking a story to the media in 2009, which was leaked by Bette. This guttersnipe stood by watching my career evaporate whilst she raked in the cash.

[Thelma Viaduct]

Why do these 'well to do' characters all have in-bred sounding names???

[chevvron]

First signed it age 15 or 16 when I joined the Royal Observer Corps (well someone had to) and we were asked to re-sign every 2 or 3 years. Subsequently re - signed on being appointed a CI in the ATC and when being commisioned in the RAFVR(T); I think I had to when I relinquished my commision too.
I certainly had to sign it on joining NATCS (now NATS) as it was part of the Board of Trade and we were civil servants.

[Fluffy Bunny]

Same here Mogwi . Can't remember signing anything at the CIO, but certainly had to sign it post demob when entering another job that required my clearances above and beyond a basic check.
That being said I'm sure I completed my PV(S) paperwork at 16 when I first applied for a job in the mob.

[Whenurhappy]

Why do these 'well to do' characters all have inbred sounding names?

An interesting facet to this story about Ms Jordan Barber, is that she took on a double-barrelled name on marriage to a young army officer, now 2ic of a very well-known Scottish battalion. She was able to hide this extra income - it seems even from her husband - by alluding to a small estate and family money Conflated with a posh accent, a signet ring and her kids at St Cakes' Prep School, no one seemed to question this apparent display of old money, for a mid-ranked civil servant, earning about the same as a Flt Lt. There will be fellow PPruners who know this insufferable woman from Main Building, and more recently, the wives' circuit at Shrivenham (they left last summer).

I suspect that the CPS selected the corruption in public office charges rather than ones from the OSA to avoid the public interest 'defence'.

The other point, about OSA, is that it is universal in its application. No one needs to sign it for it to apply, exactly the same as for other legislation.

[baffman]

Since 1989 in order to obtain a conviction under the OSA it has been necessary that the unauthorised disclosure caused actual damage to Security and Intelligence, Defence, Foreign Relations etc as quite closely defined in the Act.


Official Secrets Act 1989 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1989/6/section/2)

[tucumseh]

whenurhappy

I suspect that the CPS selected the corruption in public office charges rather than ones from the OSA to avoid the public interest 'defence'.


I think you are correct. Given one of the subjects was kit shortages, I'm not sure the raft of Ministers who lied about this would care to be called as witnesses.

On the other hand, these shortages and lies were well-known, so it seems odd the Sun would pay for the information. I'd speculate they wanted to get their hooks into a source.

If she hadn't taken money, she'd have been fine. That she now profits from selling her experiences is beyond the pale. But she's in good company. A raft of Ministers.....

[Ripline]

Just to add to the general experiences of first contact with OSA.

When you're 17, first job, away from home etc., you sign whatever you're damn well told to sign without giving it much further thought. This was in 1963 at UKAEA Harwell when going through our induction training as Scientific Assistants - the Lowest Form of Scientific Life on site. Mind you, the AEA Police at the gates did have guns, which sort of impressed us at that age.

A few months later, by the time we had spent our last week in classrooms and labs under the benevolent gaze of the GLEEP reactor, the Cockroft-Walton generator and the Megajoule capacitor Bank in Hangar 8 , this sense of awe had diminished to the point that the amount of "stores" vanishing through main gate at outmuster on the last Friday embarrassed even us when the total haul was examined back in our hostel. No wheelbarrow liberation was attempted: probably what saved us.

The goodies kept some of us busy enhancing our newly learned electronic and mechanical skills in our spare time for years, probably not what the course instructors had intended, but on balance was rather cost-effective post-course training. Even today my domestic copper pipe-work is done to experimental lab vacuum standards!

The only official advice that we were given by some of the older atomic workers was that if we ever saw smoke coming out of the BEPO reactor chimney in the middle of the site it was probably already too late to run.....

Damn, my Horlick has gone cold.

Ripline