There have been 58 complaints made to a special spy tribunal about the activities of the PSNI over the last three years.
New figures reveal that so far this year the PSNI has been named as a respondent in 33 cases lodged with the powerful Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT).
The London based tribunal looks at complaints from people who believe they have been the victim of unlawful covert interference by public authorities, including the police.
The 2024 figure is almost double the total for last year, which was 16, and treble the number of cases for 2022, which sat at nine.
Cases where the PSNI has been named as a respondent include where a member of the public or an organisation have made a complaint to the IPT, including those where other respondents are named.
In the 33 cases where the PSNI was named as a respondent this year, the force has received 19 ‘directions to disclose’ relevant material from the IPT.
The equivalent figure for last year was six, while in 2022 it was three.
The PSNI say they are only made aware of a case before the tribunal when they are directed to disclose relevant material.
The pair made a complaint in 2019 over their arrest the previous year in connection with an acclaimed 2017 documentary about the UVF sectarian murder of six Catholic men at the Heights Bar in Loughinisland, Co Down, in June 1994.
In June the PSNI admitted making 823 applications for communications data for journalists and lawyers over a 13-year period from 2011-2024.
Weeks later it emerged that more than 4,000 phone communications between 12 journalists were monitored by police over a three-month period.
The IPT figures have come to light as an independent review into PSNI spy operations targeting journalists, lawyers and human rights groups continues.
Earlier this year PSNI chief constable Jon Boutcher set up a review headed by London based KC Angus McCullough.
Daniel Holder, of the Committee on the Administration of Justice, who sits on the McCullough Review Group of Experts and Stakeholders, said the IPT figures give rise to concern.
“The tight legal rules over surveillance powers that we have thanks to human rights law are only effective if they can be enforced,” he said.
“Whilst it isn’t yet clear what these IPT complaints relate to, we have been concerned that the experiences of Barry and Trevor are likely indicative of a broader systemic problem.”
A spokesman for the PSNI said: “For some time, the Police Service of Northern Ireland has encouraged anyone with a specific complaint in relation to the use of surveillance or covert powers to engage with the Investigatory Powers Tribunal.
“It would be inappropriate for us to comment further while legal proceedings and the McCullough Review are ongoing.”
