High Court Says UK Government Can No Longer Collect Internet Data In Bulk
from the snoopers-charter:-now-with-10%-less-snooping! dept
UK civil liberties group Liberty has won a significant legal battle against the Snoopers Charter. A recent ruling [PDF] by the UK High Court says the data retention provisions, which include mandated extended storage of things like web browsing history by ISPs, are incompatible with EU privacy laws.
The court found the data retention provisions are at odds with civil liberties protections for a couple of reasons. First, the oversight is too limited to be considered protective of human rights asserted by the EU governing body. As the law stands now, demands for data don't require independent oversight or authorization.
Second, even though the Charter claims demands for data will be limited to "serious crimes," the actual wording shows there are no practical limitations preventing the government from accessing this data for nearly any reason at all.
The decision quotes the Charter's stated reasons for obtaining data, which range from "public safety," to "preventing disorder" to "assessing or collecting taxes." Obviously, the broad surveillance powers will not be limited to "serious crimes," contrary to the government's assertions in court.
First, the wording of the draft declaration is so broad that it would include areas which are outside (or potentially outside) the area of serious crime: for example, the area of national security. As will become apparent later, the issue of whether the area of national security falls within the scope of EU law at all is the subject of dispute between the parties.
The second sentence refers to the government's argument: that UK national security concerns trump European law. Unfortunately, the High Court does not provide an answer as to whether UK law can ignore CJEU decisions when it comes to securing the nation. This will have to wait until after a decision is handed down in another challenge to the surveillance law.
[I]n our view, although the terms of section 94 of the 1984 Act and the terms of Part 4 of the 2016 Act are not identical, the questions which have been referred by the IPT are not confined to the precise scope of section 94. Rather they raise broader questions about the scope of EU law, having regard to Article 4 TEU and Article 1(3) of the e-Privacy Directive; and also raise the particular question of whether any of the Watson CJEU requirements apply in the field of national security.
For those reasons we refuse the application by the Claimant to make a reference to the CJEU on this question. This part of this claim will be stayed pending the CJEU’s decision in the reference in the Privacy International case.
In the end, the court decides this part of the Snoopers Charter must be stricken and rewritten to comply with EU privacy protections. The UK government has six months to fix the law. Until that point, it appears UK agencies will still be able to demand data in bulk under the Charter draft. Once the fixes are in and enacted, bulk collections of internet browsing data and communications metadata will cease… at least until the UK exits the European Union.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: data protection, eu, mass surveillance, privacy, snooper's charter, surveillance, uk
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
FACEBOOK and GOOGLE must be chopped into TINY pieces TOO.
Corporations have NO right to collect and keep data on "natural" persons, period. -- No, they don't! They have the ability but NO right. You cannot find even a hint of such right anywhere in Common Law. Corporations are entirely fiction, a creation of lawyers with mere statute.
Anyhoo, while this could be taken as good news, don't bother! Nothing will change. Surveillance Capitalism will go on without limit, promoted by masnicks and romneys.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You don't really think things through at all, do you?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
brexit, anyone?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: brexit, anyone?
When the IC gets rebuked, the only response is to double down on stupid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: brexit, anyone?
Brexit is not what the majority want today. They certainly don't want the crash out option we're headed for.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: brexit, anyone?
The Daily Mail seems to want to go full kamikaze because will o' the people, even screaming about the House of Lords giving sovereignty to Parliament to decide on accepting or rejecting the deal the May Government puts together (or not); May's only response so far has been "Have our cake and eat it or we'll flounce out on WTO terms." Basically, she's an idiot and HM Government has done NOTHING to prepare to replace the EU agencies that are leaving — or to assume their functions.
And they call me a Remoaner. Better than being a Brexidiot.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I rarely say this...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
b) as if the government and any of the various law enforcement bodies are gonna take any notice! the UK is worse now, as far as surveillance and invasion of privacy than ALMOST all other nations on the Planet!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
*Will* cease?
Bullshit. Legally they may have to stop, but there's no reason to think they will. Or that they won't immediately restart it, in secret, under some other authority.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: *Will* cease?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thank you for visiting this site.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]