Aspects of the UK surveillance regime found to be unlawful in landmark judgment
The European Court of Human Rights has held that the bulk interception of data, in the context of the UK’s surveillance regime under RIPA 2000, violated an individual’s right to a private life under Article 8 of the Convention: (i) due to lack of oversight in s 8(4) of RIPA; and (ii) in particular as regards acquiring communications data from communication service providers under Ch II RIPA, because it is not in accordance with the law.
The Strasbourg Court also found that, in the case of journalists, both of these surveillance regimes constituted impermissible interferences to the right to freedom of expression under Article 10 of the Convention.
Can Yeginsu and Anthony Jones acted for the Center for Democracy & Technology and PEN American Center in two of the three joined applications before the Strasbourg Court (Big Brother & Ors, App No. 58170/13; Bureau of Investigative Journalists and Alice Ross, App No. 62322/14), led by Hugh Southey Q.C.
Links to further information and materials:
- The Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
- The Press Release from the European Court of Human Rights
- Reports on the decision in The Guardian, Reuters, Fox News.
Click here to view an article on Big Brother Watch and Others v. The United Kingdom case by Ian Mcdonald and John Williams of 4 New Square, in which in which Can Yeginsu and Anthony Jones acted as counsel for Center for Democracy & Technology and PEN America.