As a result of those early legal losses, the legislation was repealed and replaced by The Investigatory Powers Act 2016. So, given that the legislation being challenged is no longer in force is this judgment relevant?

There is a challenge about the new Act underway already, and that case will be heard later this year, but what is interesting is that the new Act contains some of the provisions now ruled to be unlawful.

The government has already indicated that it will again seek to amend the law, but it appears that the current proposals do not go far enough. If that analysis is correct, then the government will once again be forced into a corner so far as its surveillance programme is concerned.

At stake is the indiscriminate targeting of citizens, not just people suspected of criminal activity, but every day snooping on the lives of everyone to build up a database of information for future use. Fears over access to that database and how it might be used for different purposes in future, not just national security, are at the heart of objections to the government's plans.

The current law is objectionable as it:

  • did not restrict access to this data, in the context of the investigation and prosecution of crime, to the purpose of fighting serious crime.
  • let police and public bodies authorise their own access, instead of subjecting access requests to prior authorisation by a court or independent body.

Some, of course, say that if you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear, but campaigning group Liberty counters with this chilling observation:

"Since this legal challenge was launched in 2014, the Investigatory Powers Act has not only re-legislated for the powers found unlawful today, but gone much further.

The Act dramatically expanded powers to gather data on the entire population while maintaining the lack of safeguards that resulted in this legal challenge. It also legalised other unprecedented mass surveillance powers – including mass hacking, spying on phone calls and emails on an industrial scale and collecting huge databases containing sensitive information on millions of people."

How We Can Help

Surveillance evidence is often a feature of serious criminal cases; our solicitors are well versed in this aspect of the law and will ensure that only evidence lawfully obtained is used in court proceedings against our clients.

Share |

Make an enquiry

Form by ChronoForms - ChronoEngine.com

Latest News

Twitter

© 2019 Norton Peskett. All Rights Reserved.

Norton Peskett Solicitors