Today Sir Stanley Burnton, the Interception of Communications Commissioner, published a highly critical review of the use of Section 94 of the Telecommunications Act 1984 for gathering vast amounts of our communications data in bulk. This obscure clause pre-dates the internet era, but has been used for nearly two decades for mass surveillance. Today is the first time that these powers have been criticised by an independent statutory body.
You are here
This week in Geneva, the UN Human Rights Committee will examine the Argentina’s compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), an international treaty which places obligations on signatories to guarantee human rights such as the right to privacy.
Esta semana en Ginebra, el Comité de Derechos Humanos de la ONU examinará el cumplimiento de la Argentina con el Pacto Internacional de Derechos Civiles y Políticos (PIDCP), un tratado internacional que establece obligaciones a los firmantes para garantizar los derechos humanos, como el derecho a la privacidad.
Este examen, por un grupo de expertos independientes encargados de vigilar el cumplimiento del PIDCP, llega en un momento crítico para las leyes y políticas de la Argentina sobre la privacidad y la vigilancia.
Harmit Kambo, Campaigns Director, Privacy International said:
"The overwhelming vote by MPs last night in favour of massively intrusive new state surveillance powers represents both a failure of the democratic process and a grim watershed moment for the privacy of every one of us.
- Privacy International releases previously confidential correspondence between lawyers for MI5 and GCHQ and the former Interception of Communications Commissioner, highlighting problems with the relationship between the two bodies
- The correspondences show a lack of meaningful oversight and restraint of UK surveillance agencies
Privacy International, the leading global privacy rights NGO, has today filed a Judicial Review at the UK High Court, challenging the Investigatory Powers Tribunal's (IPT) decision that the Government can issue general hacking warrants. This decision means that British intelligence agency GCHQ can continue to hack into the computers and phones of broad classes of people - including those residing in the UK. The Investigatory Powers Bill, currently being debated in Parliament, seeks to further enshrine this power into law.
Previously confidential documents published today reveal the staggering extent of UK Government surveillance that has been kept secret from the public and Parliament for the last 15 years. Revealed in a case brought by Privacy International about the use of so-called 'Bulk Personal Datasets' and a law dating back to 1984, the extracts show that the UK Government's intelligence services, GCHQ, MI5, and MI6, routinely requisition personal data from potentially thousands of public and private organisations.
The committee of data protection regulators across Europe, the Working Party 29, announced today its opinion on the current “Privacy Shield”. The Opinion is expected shortly, and based on the statements made by the Working Party chair in a press conference, we understand that the Working Party, while noting improvements from the annulled “Safe Harbor” agreement, has serious concerns about a range of aspects of the current "Privacy Shield" agreement with the U.S.
Tomorrow (12 April, 2016), 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.