Judges urged to rule snoopers’ charter illegal
HIGH COURT judges have been urged to force the Government to urgently rewrite its surveillance laws, dubbed the snoopers’ charter by critics.
Liberty, the human rights campaign group, wants the court to make sure Parliament introduces new legislation by July after Ministers accepted some aspects of the controversial Investigatory Powers Act (IPA) were “incompatible” with EU law.
However, the Government says it is already taking steps to amend the legislation and should be given until April next year to introduce the new rules.
Lawyers for Liberty argued yesterday that the act violated the public’s right to privacy by allowing the storage of and access to internet data.
Martin Chamberlain QC said the data, which includes every bit of information apart from the content of a communication, could reveal which newspaper a person reads, where they shop, whether they have accessed pornography and which online dating sites they use.
He told the court: “Communications data can provide a comprehensive and intimate portrait of a person’s private life.
“It can be used to reveal the identity of a person who has whistle-blowing information to a journalist or to a watchdog such as Liberty.”
Mr Chamberlain said Liberty recognised that data retention and access could be “vital” for the detection and prevention of crime.
However, he added: “Intrusive capabilities must be balanced by appropriate limits and safeguards.”
The court heard the Government accepted the act was inconsistent with EU law because it did not ensure data could only be retained and accessed for “fighting serious crime” in criminal investigations and there was no independent authorisation needed before data could be used.
Mr Chamberlain said the court should “disapply” the act in relation to those two aspects, as well as other rules on retention of internet data relating to health and finances which the Government was not defending.
He said this was necessary to “provide an effective remedy” and would give the Government until July this year to make changes to the act so it is compatible with EU law.
Mr Chamberlain said the act has been incompatible with the law since it was introduced 14 months ago and continued to allow unlawful retention and access to citizens’ data.
He also urged the court to refer other parts of the act relating to national security and lawyerclient privilege, which the Government did not concede were in breach of EU law, to the Court of Justice of the European Union for further consideration.
James Eadie QC, representing the Government, said the “vast majority” of communications data retained would never be accessed by the state because most people were not affected by police or other investigations.
The hearing continues.