A person does not contravene this Act only by doing, for the purpose of safeguarding national security, anything it is proportionate to do for that purpose.
Cases considering section 192 3
Shamima Begum v The Secretary of State for the Home Department
The broad words create a general exemption from the Act for anything proportionately done to safeguard national security. The exemption concerns the act performed, not merely a substantive breach of an Equality Act duty, and excluded the public sector equality duty here (see paras [131]-[137]).
JK v LM
The defence requires that the act be done for the purpose of safeguarding national security and be proportionate for that purpose. The Tribunal assesses that objective question; for this appeal the parties agreed the applicable proportionality test. (see paras [27]–[29]; [35]; [47])
Jeffery v The British Council
The court noted that the respondent had pleaded the national-security defence under section 192. This made the contractual reference to the Official Secrets Act potentially practically significant, but the provision was not construed or determined. (see para [40])
What each judgment says about section 192 is in the case-law panel in the full Act.
606.This section ensures that the Act does not make it unlawful to do anything which is proportionate in order to safeguard national security.
607.The section replaces similar exceptions in previous legislation, narrowing those which excuse disability discrimination in some areas or sex discrimination. For the first time, it provides a national security exception in relation to age and sexual orientation discrimination outside work.