Home Secretary Theresa STASI May, saying, “I welcome this judgment from the Investigatory Powers Tribunal.”
Notably the IPT is another one of Blair’s totallitarian poison pills (RIPA 2000). The IPT appears to value its own privacy prefering to operate in privacy behind closed doors from a secret location. Only very few select IPT rulings are ever published.
The Tribunal has jurisdiction to consider complaints about the use of surveillance by any organisation with powers under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act. It is also the only judicial body with the power to investigate the conduct of the Security Service (MI5), the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) and the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ).
Total complaints 1468 Complaints upheld 10
The IPT has never upheld any complaint against GCHQ since the judicial body was established 14 years ago
Definition of privacy in English:
she returned to the privacy of her own home and emailed a friend.
Definition of violation in English:
The action of violating someone or something:
The case, prompted by revelations from the US whistleblower Edward Snowden, was filed at the IPT by Privacy International, Liberty, Amnesty International, the American Civil Liberties Union and a number of other overseas human rights groups against UK’s espionage agency, Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ).
According to leaks by Snowden, the British spying agency collects and stores vast quantities of global email messages, Facebook posts, internet histories and calls, and shares them with the US National Security Agency (NSA).
The rights organizations argued that their private communications have been probably monitored under GCHQ’s electronic surveillance program, Tempora.
They also claimed that information obtained through the Prism and Upstream programs of the NSA may have been shared with British intelligence services.
However, the court ruled on Friday that the British intelligence agencies “are not seeking, nor asserting that the system entitles them to seek to carry out what has been described as ‘mass’ or ‘bulk’ surveillance.”
“Save in one possible (and to date hypothetical) respect, we have ruled that the current regime, both in relation to Prism and Upstream [intercept programs]…when conducted in accordance with the requirements which we have considered, is lawful and human rights-compliant,” the IPT concluded.
The IPT has never upheld any complaint against GCHQ since the judicial body was established 14 years ago.
Since there is no right of appeal against the IPT’s rulings in the British courts, the human rights groups which filed the complaint said they would appeal to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France.
The human rights court will consider appeals from the IPT only if the complainants have exhausted all domestic remedies.
“We will now appeal to Strasbourg, who might not be as inclined to put their trust in the UK government given what we know so far,” said Amnesty UK’s legal adviser, Rachel Logan.
“The government has managed to bluff their way out of this, retreating into closed hearings, and constantly playing the ‘national security’ card. The tribunal has accepted that approach. We have had to painstakingly drag out every detail we could from an aggressively resistant government,” she added.
The UK government has lauded the ruling with Home Secretary Theresa May, saying, “I welcome this judgment from the Investigatory Powers Tribunal.”