3 ms·
> The judgement said: "While there is no evidence to suggest that the intelligence services are abusing their powers - on the contrary, the [then British watchd
by avmich 8y ago
> The judgement said: "While there is no evidence to suggest that the intelligence services are abusing their powers - on the contrary, the [then British watchdog] observed that the selection procedure was carefully and conscientiously undertaken by analysts, the court is not persuaded that the safeguards governing selection of bearers [internet cables] for interception and the selection of intercepted material for examination are sufficiently robust to provide adequate guarantees against abuse.
It's unclear what - and why - are criteria for sufficiency and adequacy.
- teraflop 8y agoIf UK court decisions are anything like the ones from the US Supreme Court, it's a fairly safe bet that the actual judgment is a lengthy document that explains those criteria. I wouldn't judge the thoroughness of the decision itself from a few out-of-context snippets.
- da_chicken 8y agoJournalists are also notorious for overstating and misinterpreting court rulings, to the extent that when actual monumental decisions are made it's often difficult to tell as journalists treat them the same as the extremely narrow and largely circumstantial rulings. It's almost always worth it to find the published opinion and to read that. The language is not that bad.