Advanced Search
Content Type: News & Analysis
Monday, August 19, 2019
The Watson/Tele2 decision of the CJEU concerned section 1 and 2 of DRIPA and the Data Retention Regulations 2014. This contained the legislative scheme concerning the power of the Secretary of State to require communications service providers to retain communications data. Part 3 of the Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015 amended DRIPA so that an additional category of data - that necessary to resolve Internet Protocol addresses - could be included in a requirement to retain data.
The…
Content Type: Advocacy
Monday, August 19, 2019
RESPONSE OF PRIVACY INTERNATIONAL TO THE CONSULTATION ON THE GOVERNMENT’S PROPOSED RESPONSE TO THE RULING OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION ON 21 DECEMBER 2016 REGARDING THE RETENTION OF COMMUNICATIONS DATA
[Full response below]
Introduction
The consultation is in response to the judgment in Tele2 Sverige AB v Post-och telestyrelsen (Case-203/15) and R (Watson) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Case C-698/15) [“Watson judgment”].
The case concerned section 1 and 2 of…
Content Type: Explainer
Monday, August 19, 2019
In 2000, the Government told Parliament that the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) was the total extent of surveillance powers that were needed. However, within weeks of RIPA receiving Royal Assent, a report from UK law enforcement was leaked, stating that the power the Government truly wanted was companies to retain communications data on all their users.
Immediately after 9/11 as governments around the world over-reached with new pieces of legislation, the UK Government did…
Content Type: Long Read
Thursday, August 15, 2019
Six years after NSA contractor Edward Snowden leaked documents providing details about how states' mass surveillance programmes function, two states – the UK and South Africa – publicly admit using bulk interception capabilities.
Both governments have been conducting bulk interception of internet traffic by tapping undersea fibre optic cables landing in the UK and South Africa respectively in secret for years.
Both admissions came during and as a result of legal proceedings brought by Privacy…
Content Type: News & Analysis
Wednesday, July 10, 2019
Today, Privacy International, along with nine other NGOs including Liberty and Amnesty International, attended a hearing before the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) to revisit the Court's first ruling on our case challenging UK mass surveillance and intelligence sharing. In September 2018, the First Section of the ECtHR ruled that the UK government's mass interception program violates the rights to privacy and freedom of expression. Notwithstanding the positve aspects…
Content Type: Long Read
Friday, September 28, 2018
This piece was originally published in Just Security.
Earlier this month, the European Court of Human Rights issued a major judgment in three consolidated cases challenging the U.K. government’s mass interception program, which was first revealed by Edward Snowden in 2013. That judgment finds notable deficiencies in the legal framework governing mass interception, rendering the program unlawful under Articles 8 and 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which protect the rights…
Content Type: Long Read
Thursday, September 27, 2018
Written jointly by Privacy International and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
In a landmark decision earlier this month, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that one of the mass surveillance programs revealed by Edward Snowden violates the rights to privacy and freedom of expression. While the case challenges the U.K. government’s mass interception of internet traffic transiting its borders, the court’s judgment has broader implications for mass spying programs in Europe and…
Content Type: Long Read
Friday, September 14, 2018
Yesterday, the European Court of Human Rights issued its judgement in Big Brother Watch & Others V. the UK. Below, we answer some of the main questions relating to the case.
What's the ruling all about?
In a nutshell, one of the world's most important courts, the European Court of Human Rights, yesterday found that certain UK laws about how intelligence agencies can spy on our internet communications breach our human rights. These surveillance laws have meant that the UK intelligence…
Content Type: News & Analysis
Thursday, September 13, 2018
Today was a big day for the privacy of millions of people. The European Court of Human Rights has today ruled that UK laws enabling mass interception of our communications violate the rights to privacy and freedom of expression. This finding is an important victory for human rights and the rule of law.
The judges found that:
The UK’s historical bulk interception regime violated the right to privacy protected by Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and to free expression…
Content Type: Long Read
Thursday, September 13, 2018
The European Court of Human Rights ruled today that the UK government's mass interception program violates the rights to privacy and freedom of expression. The Court held that the program "is incapable of keeping the 'interference' to what is 'necessary in a democratic society'". This finding is an important victory for human rights and the rule of law. Below, we break down the key parts of the decision.
The Court's ruling comes after a five-year battle against two UK mass surveillance…
Content Type: Press release
Thursday, September 13, 2018
The European Court of Human Rights has today ruled that UK laws enabling mass surveillance violate the rights to privacy and freedom of expression.
Judges found that:
The UK’s historical bulk interception regime violated the right to privacy protected by Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and to free expression, protected by Article 10.
The interception of communications data is as serious a breach of privacy as the interception of content, meaning the UK regime…
Content Type: Long Read
Wednesday, September 12, 2018
As we prepare for the European Court of Human Rights' judgment on the '10 Human Rights Organisations' case, here is a brief recap of its history. This landmark case has serious implications not only for the UK's mass surveillance regime, but also for the mass surveillance practices of the Council of Europe's other member states, and for such practices in other parts of the world.
The case began in 2013, following Edward Snowden’s revelations that the UK Government Communications Headquarters (…
Content Type: Report
Wednesday, September 12, 2018
Intelligence sharing between countries is one of the most pervasive and least regulated surveillance practices carried out by governments across the world. It is facilitated by rapidly evolving surveillance technologies that enable intelligence agencies to collect, store, analyse and share ever larger amounts of people’s personal information.
This briefing paper, written jointly by the International Network of Civil Liberties Organizations (INCLO) and PI, sets out urgent recommendations that…
Content Type: News & Analysis
Tuesday, November 7, 2017
For further information on timeline and case history, read this briefing.
Arguments
The argument were based on the written submissions of the parties. The oral statements summarised key points in these submissions.
The submissions can be found on PI’s website under Legal Action. In terms of today’s proceedings (these are now available through webcast)
Counsel for the UK Government, James Eadie QC started off proceedings, his opening arguments were: 1) The issues are of the utmost importance…
Content Type: Advocacy
Friday, September 1, 2017
This report sheds light on the current state of affairs in data retention regulation across the EU post the Tele-2/Watson judgment. Privacy International has consulted with digital rights NGOs and industry from across the European Union to survey 21 national jurisdictions (Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom).…
Content Type: Long Read
Monday, October 31, 2016
This piece was written by Ashley Gorski, who is an attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union, and PI legal officer Scarlet Kim and originally appeared in The Guardian here.
In recent weeks, the Hollywood film about Edward Snowden and the movement to pardon the NSA whistleblower have renewed worldwide attention on the scope and substance of government surveillance programs. In the United States, however, the debate has often been a narrow one, focused on the rights of Americans under…
Content Type: Long Read
Friday, September 30, 2016
This week, Privacy International, together with nine other international human rights NGOs, filed submissions with the European Court of Human Rights. Our case challenges the UK government’s bulk interception of internet traffic transiting fiber optic cables landing in the UK and its access to information similarly intercepted in bulk by the US government, which were revealed by the Snowden disclosures. To accompany our filing, we have produced two infographics to illustrate the complex process…
Content Type: Press release
Friday, September 30, 2016
Key points
Privacy International, Liberty, Amnesty International, and seven other human rights organizations challenge UK mass surveillance and UK access to US mass surveillance at the European Court of Human Rights
This is the first case before the European Court of Human Rights to directly challenge UK and US mass surveillance revealed by the Snowden disclosures
National courts and oversight bodies have failed to rein in mass surveillance practices that impact hundreds of millions of…
Content Type: Press release
Tuesday, July 19, 2016
Privacy International General Counsel Caroline Wilson Palow said
"Today's opinion issued by the Advocate General of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) is a serious blow to the UK's Investigatory Powers Bill (IPBill). It, hopefully, presages a strong judgment from the Court itself.
The bulk powers - what we would call mass surveillance powers - embedded throughout the IPBill go far beyond tackling serious crime. They would give a range of public bodies, not just the Police and intelligence…
Content Type: Press release
Tuesday, April 12, 2016
Tomorrow, Privacy International and Open Rights Group will argue that wholesale and indiscriminate retention of our personal data is not permissible. The case, brought by MPs Tom Watson and David Davis against the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014 (DRIPA), and in which PI intervened, will be heard in the European Court of Justice (CJEU) on 12 April. It has the potential to send shockwaves through the Investigatory Powers Bill, the controversial bill currently in Parliament.
The…
Content Type: Press release
Wednesday, July 1, 2015
The UK’s Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT) today notified the ten NGO claimants in a legal challenge against GCHQ mass surveillance practices that the Tribunal had mistakenly omitted information about unlawful GCHQ actives in their judgment from ten days ago . In an email to the claimants, including Privacy International, the Court admitted that in its 22nd June 2015 judgment it wrongly failed to declare that Amnesty International had been subject to unlawful surveillance by the British…
Content Type: Press release
Monday, June 22, 2015
The Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT) today revealed that the UK Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) spied on two international human rights organisations, failed to follow ITS own secret procedures and acted unlawfully.
The targeted NGOs are the South African Legal Resources Centre (LRC) and the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights (EIPR). Both are leading civil liberties organisations and co-claimants alongside Privacy International, Liberty, Amnesty International, Bytes For…
Content Type: Long Read
Wednesday, April 22, 2015
Few revelations have been been as troubling for the right to privacy as uncovering the scope of the Five Eyes alliance. The intelligence club made up of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States has integrated its collection efforts, staff, bases, and analysis programs. Yet the legal rulebook governing how the agencies ensure the most comprehensive joint surveillance effort in the history of mankind remains secret.
The little that is known suggests a…
Content Type: Press release
Friday, April 10, 2015
Privacy International and several other human rights organisations are taking the UK Government to the European Court of Human Rights over its mass surveillance practices, after a judgement last year found that collecting all internet traffic flowing in and out of the UK and bulk intelligence sharing with the United States was legal.
The appeal, filed last week by Privacy International, Bytes for All, Amnesty International, Liberty, and other partners, comes in response to a ruling in December…