Search
Content type: Long Read
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
On 17 October 2016, the Investigatory Powers Tribunal handed down judgment in a case brought by Privacy International against the Foreign Secretary, the Home Secretary and the three Security and Intelligence Agencies (MI5, MI6 and GCHQ).
The case concerned the Agencies’ acquisition and use of bulk personal datasets (‘BPD’) – datasets that contain personal data about individuals, the majority of whom are unlikely to be of intelligence interest, such as passport databases and finance-related…
Content type: Long Read
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
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
Caroline Wilson Palow, General Counsel, Privacy International said:
“David Anderson QC’s report raises more questions than it answers.
Anderson has not assessed the proportionality of the bulk powers he reviewed. Ultimately, the proportionality question is the crucial one. Would the public find these kind of powers acceptable in a democratic society given their potential to vastly intrude into our privacy? Mere usefulness cannot be and is not the legal test for whether bulk powers should be…
Content type: Long Read
Privacy International’s case on Bulk Personal Datasets and Bulk Communications Data comes to a head with a four-day hearing in the Investigatory Powers Tribunal which commenced on 26 July 2016.
The litigation has brought to light significant revelations about the use of section 94 of the 1984 Telecommunications Act to obtain bulk communications data.
Large amounts of disclosure have shed new light on this hitherto secret power and explained confusing aspects of the Government’s Response to…
Content type: Press release
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: News & Analysis
One of the most controversial aspects of the UK's Investigatory Powers Bill proposes the storing by ISPs and mobile network providers of 'Internet Connection Records' (ICRs). While vaguely defined, they will include your internet browsing history (although the Government is at pains to clarify that only the websites you visit, not the specific webpages on those websites will be stored), and what apps you have accessed, over the previous 12 months.
Clearly then ICRs are personal data, so…
Content type: Press release
A new Twitter Bot, launched today by the global privacy rights organisation Privacy International, ‘reveals’ the internet browsing history of leading politicians, as well as details of their telephone, text message, WhatsApp, and even Snapchat communications. @GCHQbot has been launched to raise the profile of the sensitivity of our internet browsing history and communications data, on the day that the Investigatory Powers Bill begins its Committee Stage in the House of Lords.
Bot: https://…
Content type: Press release
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. IOCCO is critical of the Government's use of these…
Content type: Press release
Tomorrow, on 26 July, the main hearing will begin in Privacy International's legal challenge against MI6, MI5, and GCHQ's collection of bulk communications data and bulk personal datasets. Previously secret documents will be made public at the hearing, and Privacy International will brief attending journalists about the significance of the disclosed documents.
The hearing will include references to important documents detailing the collection of data on every citizen in the UK including:…
Content type: Press release
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.
Over the course of the Bill Committee stage, Privacy International, alongside experts from academia, technology firms, the legal profession, human rights organisations, and civil liberties groups have proposed over…
Content type: Press release
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
Ahead of the vital commons vote on the Investigatory Powers Bill, we need to create a system that guarantees better oversight of surveillance powers
Today, under embargo…
Content type: News & Analysis
Another committee-led scrutiny. Another list of changes that need to be made to the Investigatory Powers Bill. This seems familiar.
The Joint Committee on Human Rights has weighed in with scrutiny of the Investigatory Powers Bill prior to the Bill’s debate and vote in the House of Commons on the 6 and 7 June. The recommendations the report contains once again raise questions about the fitness of the Bill to be passed in its current form.
The Committee identified thematic warrants - which…
Content type: News & Analysis
Thank you to those of you who joined our campaign, 'Did GCHQ Illegally Spy on You?'. If you made a claim to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT) - the court that hears claims about surveillance by public bodies, including the intelligence agencies - to find out if GCHQ has illegally obtained your communications, you will have probably received a letter or email from the IPT by now. We've written a 'Frequently Asked Questions' (FAQ) to help clarify what the ruling means and how you can now…
Content type: Press release
Despite Government attempts to stop 650 claims about surveillance being investigated, the Investigatory Powers Tribunal has today ruled that the cases can be heard
However, the Tribunal is requiring the 650 claimants to submit further information demonstrating that they are "potentially at risk" of unlawful surveillance, prior to investigating their claims of unlawful spying
The Tribunal has said that people outside the UK have no legal right to find out if British intelligence agencies…
Content type: News & Analysis
This letter originally appeared here.
Dear Home Secretary
You are fortunate that the SNP and Labour Party courageously abstained from the vote on the Investigatory Powers Bill, content with government assurances that mass surveillance of British citizens is not government policy. Mass surveillance is not, and could never be, government policy. Merely government practice.
I congratulate you on your much-quoted claim that the Investigatory Powers Bill will contain a “world-leading oversight…
Content type: News & Analysis
“It’s like 10,000 spoons when all you need is a knife”. Alanis Morissette thought that was ironic. I never thought so. I suggest a far more ironic lyric to you Alanis - "It’s like the Home Office not listening during a consultation about how it wants to listen to everything you do’. OK, it might not be the catchiest lyric, but you can’t say it’s not ironic.
Today the latest version of the Investigatory Powers Bill was published. The Government might want some credit for being transparent and…
Content type: Press release
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…
Content type: News & Analysis
Section 217 and the Draft Code of Practice on Interception of Communications
Tech giants including Apple Inc, Facebook Inc, Google Inc, Microsoft Corp, Twitter Inc and Yahoo Inc have been openly critical of the UK Government’s Investigatory Power Bill (IPBill). However, what has not been highlighted is a deeply concerning Draft Code of Practice on Interception on Communications, which will not only affect telecommunications companies small and large, but result in costs to the taxpayer and…
Content type: News & Analysis
The Investigatory Powers Bill introduced on Tuesday 1 March contains the same range of ‘bulk powers’ envisaged in the earlier draft: bulk interception warrants; bulk acquisition warrants; bulk equipment interference warrants; and bulk personal dataset warrants.
These powers, if adopted as currently envisaged in the Bill, would codify a practice of mass, untargeted surveillance by the UK intelligence services.
In the last couple of years, some of the mass surveillance powers used by GCHQ have…
Content type: Press release
Today’s report by the Joint Committee on the Investigatory Powers Bill is the third committee report that concludes that the Home Office has failed to provide a coherent surveillance framework.
The Joint Committee on the Investigatory Powers Bill today published a 198 page report following a short consultation period between November and January. Their key findings are that:
- the definitions in the bill need much work, including a meaningful and comprehensible definition of 'data'…
Content type: News & Analysis
The problems with thematic warrants and why they should be removed from the UK Government’s Investigatory Powers Bill
We currently have the rare opportunity to scrutinise and debate the powers that law enforcement, the security and intelligence agencies and public bodies should have to interfere with our private communications, our devices and our digital lives. These powers are being enshrined and expanded upon in the draft Investigatory Powers Bill (IP Bill), currently under scrutiny by the…
Content type: Press release
Gus Hosein, Executive Director, Privacy International said:
“Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) has today slammed the Government’s draft Investigatory Powers Bill for its lack of transparency, lack of clarity and lack of privacy protections. We urge the Home Office to take on board the wide ranging criticisms that the tech sector, civil society, and now even the Parliamentary committee that oversees the surveillance capabilities of the intelligence agencies, have made of…
Content type: Press release
Privacy International welcomes the Committee’s report on the draft Investigatory Powers Bill (IP Bill). The report mirrors what many from across the technology sector and civil society have been saying: the lack of clarity in the draft Bill risks undermining security and privacy.
The Committee encountered almost universal confusion regarding the meaning of “Internet Connection Records” and what the collection of such records would entail. As the Committee has said in their report, to…