The Court of Appeal in England and Wales has ruled that security services and public bodies self-approving access to Internet connection and phone records under the previous Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act (DRIPA) was illegal. This is the latest development in a crowdfunded case brought by deputy Labour Party leader Tom Watson and crowdfunded by human rights and privacy campaigners Liberty. While today's judgment refers to what was possible under DRIPA, which expired at the end of 2016, it has implications for the Investigatory Powers Act (IP Act), which came into effect last January. When it was first passed, the IP Act, ruled that police, security services and other public bodies get express permission from the Investigatory Powers Commissioner, a new role which was created following the IP Act's passing, and the Secretary of State, thereby adding an element of oversight missing from previous legislation. However, that was found to be incompatible with European law, which ruled that data should only be accessed for investigations into the most serious crimes. The Home Office then came back with a set of definitions for what it considers 'most serious' - in addition to what is already covered by the Serious Crime Act. These include: "investigations into all offences for which an adult is capable of being sentenced to six months or more in prison; any offence involving violence; any offence which involves a large number of people acting in pursuit of a common purpose; any offence committed by a body corporate; any offence which involves the sending of a communication or a breach of privacy; or any offence involving a significant financial gain." The Home Office also proposed creating an Office for Communications Data Authorisation (OCDA), which would assist the Investigatory Powers Commissioner in processing data requests. Investigatory Powers Act: Will ISPs have to collect subscriber’s history while gov appeals EU ruling? While this would remove the need for an experienced magistrate to rubber-stamp, OCDA staff would require extensive recruitment and training in order to process data requests from over six hundred public bodies. Liberty called the proposals "half-baked" and argue that these wouldn't see the IP Act comply with previous European rulings. They will instead; “continue to allow public bodies to indiscriminately retain and access personal data, including records of internet use, location tracking using mobile phones and records of who we communicate with and when." The Home Office has repeatedly said that access to communications data is of vital importance as it's used in 95 per cent of serious and organised crime investigations handled by the CPS as well as every counter terrorist operation over the last decade. In a separate case, due to be heard in the High Court in February, Liberty has launched a legal challenge to the parts of the Investigatory Powers Act which gives security services the legal right to hack into the devices of targeted individuals, read communications and access databases held by public and private bodies, typically called bulk personal datasets (BPDs) in whitepapers. “Hacking” by Johan Viirok is licensed under CC BY 2.0.
Wir nutzen Cookies auf unserer Website. Einige von ihnen sind essenziell für den Betrieb der Seite, während andere uns helfen, diese Website und die Nutzererfahrung zu verbessern (Tracking Cookies). Sie können selbst entscheiden, ob Sie die Cookies zulassen möchten. Bitte beachten Sie, dass bei einer Ablehnung womöglich nicht mehr alle Funktionalitäten der Seite zur Verfügung stehen.
The Court of Appeal in England and Wales has ruled that security services and public bodies self-approving access to Internet connection and phone records under the previous Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act (DRIPA) was illegal. This is the latest development in a crowdfunded case brought by deputy Labour Party leader Tom Watson and crowdfunded by human rights and privacy campaigners Liberty. While today's judgment refers to what was possible under DRIPA, which expired at the end of 2016, it has implications for the Investigatory Powers Act (IP Act), which came into effect last January. When it was first passed, the IP Act, ruled that police, security services and other public bodies get express permission from the Investigatory Powers Commissioner, a new role which was created following the IP Act's passing, and the Secretary of State, thereby adding an element of oversight missing from previous legislation. However, that was found to be incompatible with European law, which ruled that data should only be accessed for investigations into the most serious crimes. The Home Office then came back with a set of definitions for what it considers 'most serious' - in addition to what is already covered by the Serious Crime Act. These include: "investigations into all offences for which an adult is capable of being sentenced to six months or more in prison; any offence involving violence; any offence which involves a large number of people acting in pursuit of a common purpose; any offence committed by a body corporate; any offence which involves the sending of a communication or a breach of privacy; or any offence involving a significant financial gain." The Home Office also proposed creating an Office for Communications Data Authorisation (OCDA), which would assist the Investigatory Powers Commissioner in processing data requests. Investigatory Powers Act: Will ISPs have to collect subscriber’s history while gov appeals EU ruling? While this would remove the need for an experienced magistrate to rubber-stamp, OCDA staff would require extensive recruitment and training in order to process data requests from over six hundred public bodies. Liberty called the proposals "half-baked" and argue that these wouldn't see the IP Act comply with previous European rulings. They will instead; “continue to allow public bodies to indiscriminately retain and access personal data, including records of internet use, location tracking using mobile phones and records of who we communicate with and when." The Home Office has repeatedly said that access to communications data is of vital importance as it's used in 95 per cent of serious and organised crime investigations handled by the CPS as well as every counter terrorist operation over the last decade. In a separate case, due to be heard in the High Court in February, Liberty has launched a legal challenge to the parts of the Investigatory Powers Act which gives security services the legal right to hack into the devices of targeted individuals, read communications and access databases held by public and private bodies, typically called bulk personal datasets (BPDs) in whitepapers. “Hacking” by Johan Viirok is licensed under CC BY 2.0.