Just days after reports that the NSA can access about 70% of the world’s cellphone networks by monitoring high-value communications and exploiting network vulnerabilities, the UK has released the findings of a tribunal investigating whether mass surveillance of citizens violates human rights.
Privacy groups including Privacy International and Bytes for All brought a case to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT) against the UK government, largely in response to the Snowden disclosures. Those revelations created public concern that intelligence agencies can intrude into the devices and communications of large groups of people without proper legal safeguards.
The IPT concluded that the surveillance programs used by the UK’s GCHQ and the US NSA are lawful under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA). Enacted 14 years ago amid urgent debates about terrorism, internet crime, and child exploitation, RIPA grants authorities powers that include interception of communications, access to communications data, directed surveillance, use of covert human intelligence sources, and intrusive surveillance.
RIPA has attracted criticism and scrutiny for many years because of how those powers have been applied. In one notable case in Poole in 2008, council officials used surveillance on three children and their parents 21 times to determine whether they lived within a particular school catchment area. Local enforcement also used covert surveillance on fishermen to check for illegal cockle and clam harvesting. In June 2008 the chairman of the Local Government Association, Sir Simon Milton, urged council leaders across England not to use RIPA powers “for trivial matters” and suggested annual reviews by appropriate scrutiny committees.
Over time, some public bodies have adopted a more cautious approach. The Office of Surveillance Commissioners’ most recent report shows 8,477 authorizations for Directed Surveillance by public bodies—a decline of more than 1,400 compared with the previous year—suggesting a reduction in casual or excessive use.
Nevertheless, concerns persist about RIPA’s reach. In October 2014, UK police used RIPA to obtain information about journalists’ sources in at least two high-profile cases—the Plebgate inquiry and the prosecution of Chris Huhne. In both instances, telephone records for journalists were acquired without the usual court procedures typically required to access such material.
Following the IPT’s ruling that mass surveillance is lawful under UK legislation, Privacy International and Bytes for All plan to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights. The organizations will ask the court to examine GCHQ’s actions and assess whether those practices respect the rights to privacy and freedom of expression guaranteed by Articles 8 and 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Further updates will be provided as the case progresses.
Do you think mass surveillance violates human rights? Let us know in the comments.