Tribunal will not automatically listen to unlawful spying claims

The 650 Investigatory Powers Tribunal claimants will need to provide further evidence they were wrongfully spied on

spying

The Investigatory Powers Tribunal has ruled that the 650 people who said they were wrongfully spied upon by British and American authorities will have to provide further evidence of surveillance before the government will listen to their claims.

If the claimants provide the evidence, the Tribunal will then decide whether the cases will be fully investigated or not. The Tribunal stressed that they will not automatically be looked into.

The complaints came forward after Privacy International campaigned for people who thought they had been unlawfully watched to state their concerns about GCHQ digging into their digital life without their permission last year.

Around 650 people responded and said they wanted the government to investigate into what information had been mined and why they had been selected for investigation.

"Given that these claims arise in the context of the bulk surveillance activities of the UK and US Governments, the Tribunal's requirement that claimants submit further information on why they think they would be spied on before deciding whether to fully investigate their claims is unacceptable," Scarlet Kim, legal officer at Privacy International said.

The Investigatory Powers Tribunal also stated that non-UK residents could not make a claim against the UK government for violating the European Convention on Human Rights, but Privacy International believes this is wrong and goes against the Convention, because the law states that anyone is protected, regardless of where they are located.

"The Tribunal's refusal to recognise the human rights claims of non-UK residents is ill-founded," Kim added. "When a member state to the European Convention on Human Rights commits a human rights violation on its own territory - whether by unlawfully suppressing free speech rights, expropriating property, or conducting surveillance - the victims are entitled to judicial relief no matter where they live."

"An essential feature of any true democratic society is that covert breaches of the law are disclosed to the victims. The Tribunal's decision is yet another example of the lack of genuine and rigorous public scrutiny of the British intelligence services," she concluded.

Featured Resources

Defeating ransomware with unified security from WatchGuard

How SMBs can defend against the onslaught of ransomware attacks

Free download

The IT expert’s guide to AI and content management

How artificial intelligence and machine learning could be critical to your business

Free download

The path to CX excellence

Four stages to thrive in the experience economy

Free download

Becoming an experience-based business

Your blueprint for a strong digital foundation

Free download

Most Popular

What are the pros and cons of AI?
machine learning

What are the pros and cons of AI?

8 Sep 2021
Apple patches zero-day flaw abused by infamous NSO exploit
exploits

Apple patches zero-day flaw abused by infamous NSO exploit

14 Sep 2021
Google takes down map showing homes of 111,000 Guntrader customers
data breaches

Google takes down map showing homes of 111,000 Guntrader customers

2 Sep 2021