By: Annette Brinckerhoff
UK’s surveillance legislation has been ruled unlawful by London’s high court. The Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act was introduced last year in a matter of days and required internet and phone companies to keep communication data for a year.
Two MP’s, Tom Watson and David Davis, along with civil rights group, Liberty, took the government to the High Court over DRIPA.
The court found that the legislation didn’t provide enough guidelines and regulations how government agencies could access and utilize the data. It deemed that there needed to be space for an independent court or judiciary to supervise how the implementation of data, and that there wasn’t a clear definition for what constitutes as a “serious offense”.
The court also required UK legislators to submit new legislation with clearer guidelines by March. The legislation was supposed to expire at the end of 2016, so the decision of the court reflected what the new legislation should contain in order to respect privacy, ensure it’s correct application, and maintain a comprehensive security strategy.
The legislation was decided to violate article seven and eight of the European convention on human rights: the right to respect for private and family life and protection of personal data.
The MP’s in favor of overturning the legislation argued that there were no safeguards to protect the privacy of people like lawyers, activists, and journalists. They also argued that the use of the data was not restricted to serious offenses and didn’t limit the collection to data only in the EU.
On the other hand, the Home Office condemned the court for ruling the legislation unlawful because of its implications on security. Security minister John Hayes said, “We disagree absolutely with this judgment and will seek an appeal… The effect of this judgment would be that in certain cases, communications data that could potentially save lives would only be available to the police and other law enforcement if a communications company had decided to retain it for commercial reasons. We believe that is wrong.” Hayes believes that the data collected should be used in regular criminal cases as well, to locate suicidal or missing persons.
Prime Minister David Cameron has said that the measures in the legislation were vital to protect the country from the threat posed by ISIS, especially with the increasing number of British nationals traveling to Iraq and Syria to fight for them. Cameron’s government promised an increase in the powers of police and spies to monitor communications to keep up with the rising use of technology.
This decision will shape the debate as MPs discuss the future of UK’s data collection and surveillance laws. DRIPA was hastily passed in the days before parliament went on summer recess, in what should have been a lengthy process. Now, they have a chance to thoroughly draft legislation that will respect people’s privacy while allowing police and intelligence agencies to do their jobs well. The key to this will be to set up clear guidelines, defining where it’s implementation is appropriate, and developing a supervising hierarchy to ensure the data is being used only on cases of serious offenses.