Advanced Search
Content Type: Long Read
On 8 January 2021, the UK High Court issued a judgment in the case of Privacy International v. Investigatory Powers Tribunal. The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and Government Communication Headquarters (GCHQ) appeared as interested parties to the case.
After our initial reaction, below we answer some of the main questions relating to the case.
NOTE: This post reflects our initial reaction to the judgment and may be updated.
What’s the ruling all about?
In…
Content Type: Frequently Asked Questions
On 8 January 2021, the UK High Court issued a judgment in the case of Privacy International v. Investigatory Powers Tribunal. The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and Government Communication Headquarters (GCHQ) appeared as interested parties to the case.
After our initial reaction, below we answer some of the main questions relating to the case.
NOTE: This post reflects our initial reaction to the judgment and may be updated.
Content Type: News & Analysis
Today, the UK High Court has quashed a decision by the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT) and held that section 5 of the Intelligence Services Act (ISA) 1994 does not permit the issue of general warrants to authorise property interference and certain forms of computer hacking.
The Court referred to cases dating back to the 18th century, which demonstrate the common law’s insistence that the Government cannot search private premises without lawful authority even in the national security…
Content Type: Press release
Today, the UK High Court has quashed a decision by the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT), and ruled that section 5 of the Intelligence Services Act (ISA) 1994 does not permit the issuing of general warrants to authorise property interference and certain forms of computer hacking.
The Court referred to cases dating back to the 18th century, which demonstrate the common law’s insistence that the Government cannot search private premises without lawful authority even in the context of national…
Content Type: Press release
The case stems from a 2016 decision by the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT), the UK tribunal tasked with examining complaints against the UK intelligence services, that the UK government could lawfully use sweeping ‘thematic warrants’ to engage in computer hacking of thousands or even millions of devices, without any approval by a judge or individualised reasonable grounds for suspicion. Thematic warrants are general warrants covering an entire class of property, persons or conduct, such as…
Content Type: Long Read
Privacy and security are both essential to protecting individuals, including their autonomy and dignity. Undermining privacy undermines the security of individuals, their devices and the broader infrastructure. People need privacy to freely secure themselves, their information, and fully enjoy other rights. However, a growing number of governments around the world are embracing hacking to facilitate their surveillance activities.
As a form of government surveillance, hacking presents…
Content Type: Frequently Asked Questions
On 27 October 2020, the UK Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) issued a report into three credit reference agencies (CRAs) - Experian, Equifax and TransUnion - which also operate as data brokers for direct marketing purposes.
After our initial reaction, below we answer some of the main questions regarding this report.
Content Type: News & Analysis
Privacy International (PI) welcomes today's report from the UK Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) into three credit reference agencies (CRAs) which also operate as data brokers for direct marketing purposes. As a result, the ICO has ordered the credit reference agency Experian to make fundamental changes to how it handles people's personal data within its offline direct marketing services.
It is a long overdue enforcement action against Experian.…
Content Type: News & Analysis
Almost a year and a half ago we complained about seven companies to three data protection authorities in Europe. These companies, ranging from AdTech to data brokers and credit rating agencies, thrive on the collection, exploitation and processing of personal data. They profile and categorise people - without our knowledge and infringing multiple legal requirements.
Now, the French Data Protection Authority CNIL has informed us that they are following the same route and …
Content Type: Case Study
In early May 2019, it was revealed that a spyware, exploiting a vulnerability in Facebook’s WhatsApp messaging app, had been installed onto Android and iOS phones. The spyware could be used to turn on the camera and mic of the targeted phones and collect emails, messages, and location data. Citizen Lab, the organization that discovered the vulnerability, said that the spyware was being used to target journalists and human rights advocates in different countries around the world. The spyware…
Content Type: Advocacy
Privacy International provided comments to the UK Financial Conduct Authority on the Terms of Reference to its Credit Information Market Study.
We highlighted that:
Credit data (whether ‘traditional’ credit data; data from Open Banking sources, or other sources of data like social media) are hugely revealing of people’s lives far beyond the state of their financial affairs.
The affects upon consumer behaviour of this use of data in the credit sector extends beyond the choices they…
Content Type: Advocacy
Dear Chair and Committee colleagues,
Privacy International is an international NGO, based in London, which works with partners around the world to challenge state and corporate surveillance and data exploitation. As part of our work, we have a dedicated programme “Defending Democracy and Dissent” where we advocate for limits on data exploitation throughout the electoral cycle.
We have been closely following the important work of the Committee. Prompted by the additional evidence provided…
Content Type: Long Read
Details of case:
R (on the application of Privacy International) (Appellant) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal and others (Respondents)
[2019] UKSC 22
15 May 2019
The judgment
What two questions was the Supreme Court asked to answer?
Whether section 67(8) of RIPA 2000 “ousts” the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court to quash a judgment of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal for error of law?
Whether, and, if so, in accordance with what principles, Parliament may by…
Content Type: Press release
Today, after a five year battle with the UK government, Privacy International has won at the UK Supreme Court. The UK Supreme Court has ruled that the Investigatory Powers Tribunal’s (IPT) decisions are subject to judicial review in the High Court. The Supreme Court's judgment is a major endorsement and affirmation of the rule of law in the UK. The decision guarantees that when the IPT gets the law wrong, its mistakes can be corrected.
Key point:
UK Supreme Court rules that the UK spying…
Content Type: Press release
The Irish Data Protection Commission has today launched an inquiry into the data practices of ad-tech company Quantcast, a major player in the online tracking industry. PI's 2018 investigation and subsequent submission to the Irish DPC showed how the company is systematically collecting and exploiting people's data in ways people are unaware of. PI also investigated and complained about Acxiom, Criteo, Experian, Equifax, Oracle, and Tapad.
PI welcomes this announcement and its focus on…
Content Type: News & Analysis
Federal law enforcement is deploying powerful computer hacking tools to conduct domestic criminal and immigration investigations.
By Alex Betschen, Student Attorney, Civil Liberties & Transparency Clinic, University at Buffalo School of Law
Hacking by the government raises grave privacy concerns, creating surveillance possibilities that were previously the stuff of science fiction. It also poses a security risk, because hacking takes advantage of unpatched vulnerabilities in our…
Content Type: Press release
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December 21, 2018
CONTACTS:
Alex Betschen, Civil Liberties & Transparency Clinic, alexbets@buffalo.edu, 716–531–6649
Colton Kells, Civil Liberties & Transparency Clinic, coltonke@buffalo.edu, 585–766–5119
Abdullah Hasan, ACLU, ahasan@aclu.org, 646–905–8879
NEW YORK — Privacy International, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the Civil Liberties & Transparency Clinic of the University at Buffalo School of Law filed a lawsuit today…