5 ms·

Privacy International files legal challenge against UK government

132 points by justincormack 13y ago

bobwaycott 13y ago
That this case must be tried in a secret court which is not obligated to promulgate its decisisons ought to indicate what result and information we will see.
jsmcgd 13y ago
"While Privacy International intended to file the Prism claim in the Administrative Court, which would have made the proceedings public, Government lawyers, upon receiving notice of our intention, vociferously notified us that we could not bring such a claim in the Administrative Court. Rather, the claim has been forced to be filed with the IPT, a secret tribunal that does not make its proceeding public or have to justify reasons for its decisions." So what's the point then? It would be very easy to lean on a few tribunal members, and with no pressure in the opposite direction, which way we do reasonably expect them to act? They will side with intelligence services and we won't know why. Very unsatisfactory.
- weland 13y ago
  > or have to justify reasons for its decisions. Whoa. What kind of a tribunal is that? This is dystopian beyond words. Even in the fifties, the most outrageous, crime-filed years of communism, the People's Tribunals still justified their decisions. It was a facade -- everyone knew it was bollocks -- but all decisions were motivated. I get private hearings (e.g. for security reasons, both the state's and the personal security of those who participate in them); they are used in many countries. But not having to publish a motivation for a decision, that's... beyond words.
  - Joeboy 13y ago
    > Whoa. What kind of a tribunal is that? "in the period 2000 to 2009, five out of at least 956 complaints made have been upheld", says https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investigatory_Powers_Tribunal#Cases https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investigatory_Powers_Tribunal#... A bunch of women who were conned into having relationships with, and in some cases having the children of, undercover police officers are currently fighting a case behind closed doors in the IPT, which presumably will not find in their favour. I imagine the IPT's purpose is to present an additional obstacle before they can go to the European Court of Human Rights. It's fucked up.
  - mtgx 13y ago
    Yeah, I don't get it. So they are going to argue against secret laws, at at ... secret tribunal? That seems very hopeless to me.
- tehwalrus 13y ago
  I'm surprised they listened to the "vociferous" Government lawyers, presumably they were compelled? It's a shame so much of UK law has been swept under the carpet with stuff like this.
- user24 13y ago
  Democracy is founded on the principle of an informed public. Secret laws and secret courts are the absolute antithesis of democracy. I just had to say that. Hi government. Please don't come after me. (But no-one will know that you did if you do).
peterkelly 13y ago
One question that comes to my mind in all of this is the professional ethics of the engineering staff involved with building & maintaining these systems. One of the core principles of ethics in the field of medicine is "first do no harm". The closest thing we have in IT is the ACM code of ethics (http://www.acm.org/about/code-of-ethics http://www.acm.org/about/code-of-ethics), but that gives conflicting guidance in some areas (e.g. "1.7 Respect the privacy of others" and "1.8 Honor confidentiality"). I understand that there are many good, well-intentioned people working for the NSA and similar organisations doing what they at least perceive to be something in service of their country. I also understand that many people just view their job as a source of income, and the moral or otherwise nature of their employer's business is something they consider to be outside of their concern. I personally have refused to get involved with the local defense industry in my hometown of Adelaide (which is perhaps the largest employer of software engineers in my state) because I didn't want to find myself working on projects I was personally uncomfortable with. Should the people involved with building and maintaining these systems (to the extent that they are aware of how the systems are used and the moral/ethical/legal violations involved) be considered responsible in part? There's no rule I'm aware of that says you can't just refuse to take part in a project if you're not comfortable with it. EDIT: One other point I forgot to mention before is that these mass surveillance systems only exist because there are people willing to build them. If everyone said no, we're not going to do that no matter how much you pay us, governments would not have these tools.
- motters 13y ago
  Likewise I also have no interest in any work which involves spying or building weapons. However, we're living through extremely difficult economic times and I can totally appreciate how for some people putting your personal beliefs to one side in order to feed your family and ensure that your home isn't repossessed is a trade-off which many will be willing to make.
  - hack_37 13y ago
    Highly qualified engineer working for the government on a highly sophisticated data-mining system ? Please don't be so naive or at least make a better attempt at finding an excuse.
chmars 13y ago
The Swiss Digital Society (Digitale Gesellschaft in German) – the Swiss Chaos Computer Club (CCC) is among the members – has also filed a legal complaint because of Prism, Tempora etc.: http://www.digitale-gesellschaft.ch/2013/07/07/strafanzeige-wegen-verbotenem-nachrichtendienst-bezuglich-prismtempora/ http://www.digitale-gesellschaft.ch/2013/07/07/strafanzeige-... (German) http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.digitale-gesellschaft.ch%2F2013%2F07%2F07%2Fstrafanzeige-wegen-verbotenem-nachrichtendienst-bezuglich-prismtempora%2F http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&pre... (Google translation)
nodata 13y ago
Good on those lawyers. Go them! (Wow. What a turnaround.)
UVB-76 13y ago
I'm glad to see this happening. The programmes are unquestionably a breach of the ECHR; human rights violations on an unprecedented scale. Alas, if the PRISM/Tempora/etc. scandal has taught us one thing, it's that governments consider themselves above the law. Even in the exceptionally unlikely event that these complaints were upheld, and the government were held to account for their actions, the public have no way of verifying the programmes are dismantled, and not reassembled in a different guise. It's over. There is no trust in government anymore.

132 points by justincormack 13y ago

That this case must be tried in a secret court which is not obligated to promulgate its decisisons ought to indicate what result and information we will see.

jsmcgd 13y ago

"While Privacy International intended to file the Prism claim in the Administrative Court, which would have made the proceedings public, Government lawyers, upon receiving notice of our intention, vociferously notified us that we could not bring such a claim in the Administrative Court. Rather, the claim has been forced to be filed with the IPT, a secret tribunal that does not make its proceeding public or have to justify reasons for its decisions." So what's the point then? It would be very easy to lean on a few tribunal members, and with no pressure in the opposite direction, which way we do reasonably expect them to act? They will side with intelligence services and we won't know why. Very unsatisfactory.

weland 13y ago
> or have to justify reasons for its decisions. Whoa. What kind of a tribunal is that? This is dystopian beyond words. Even in the fifties, the most outrageous, crime-filed years of communism, the People's Tribunals still justified their decisions. It was a facade -- everyone knew it was bollocks -- but all decisions were motivated. I get private hearings (e.g. for security reasons, both the state's and the personal security of those who participate in them); they are used in many countries. But not having to publish a motivation for a decision, that's... beyond words.
- Joeboy 13y ago
  > Whoa. What kind of a tribunal is that? "in the period 2000 to 2009, five out of at least 956 complaints made have been upheld", says https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investigatory_Powers_Tribunal#Cases https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investigatory_Powers_Tribunal#... A bunch of women who were conned into having relationships with, and in some cases having the children of, undercover police officers are currently fighting a case behind closed doors in the IPT, which presumably will not find in their favour. I imagine the IPT's purpose is to present an additional obstacle before they can go to the European Court of Human Rights. It's fucked up.
- mtgx 13y ago
  Yeah, I don't get it. So they are going to argue against secret laws, at at ... secret tribunal? That seems very hopeless to me.
tehwalrus 13y ago
I'm surprised they listened to the "vociferous" Government lawyers, presumably they were compelled? It's a shame so much of UK law has been swept under the carpet with stuff like this.
user24 13y ago
Democracy is founded on the principle of an informed public. Secret laws and secret courts are the absolute antithesis of democracy. I just had to say that. Hi government. Please don't come after me. (But no-one will know that you did if you do).

peterkelly 13y ago

One question that comes to my mind in all of this is the professional ethics of the engineering staff involved with building & maintaining these systems. One of the core principles of ethics in the field of medicine is "first do no harm". The closest thing we have in IT is the ACM code of ethics (http://www.acm.org/about/code-of-ethics http://www.acm.org/about/code-of-ethics), but that gives conflicting guidance in some areas (e.g. "1.7 Respect the privacy of others" and "1.8 Honor confidentiality"). I understand that there are many good, well-intentioned people working for the NSA and similar organisations doing what they at least perceive to be something in service of their country. I also understand that many people just view their job as a source of income, and the moral or otherwise nature of their employer's business is something they consider to be outside of their concern. I personally have refused to get involved with the local defense industry in my hometown of Adelaide (which is perhaps the largest employer of software engineers in my state) because I didn't want to find myself working on projects I was personally uncomfortable with. Should the people involved with building and maintaining these systems (to the extent that they are aware of how the systems are used and the moral/ethical/legal violations involved) be considered responsible in part? There's no rule I'm aware of that says you can't just refuse to take part in a project if you're not comfortable with it. EDIT: One other point I forgot to mention before is that these mass surveillance systems only exist because there are people willing to build them. If everyone said no, we're not going to do that no matter how much you pay us, governments would not have these tools.

motters 13y ago
Likewise I also have no interest in any work which involves spying or building weapons. However, we're living through extremely difficult economic times and I can totally appreciate how for some people putting your personal beliefs to one side in order to feed your family and ensure that your home isn't repossessed is a trade-off which many will be willing to make.
- hack_37 13y ago
  Highly qualified engineer working for the government on a highly sophisticated data-mining system ? Please don't be so naive or at least make a better attempt at finding an excuse.

chmars 13y ago

The Swiss Digital Society (Digitale Gesellschaft in German) – the Swiss Chaos Computer Club (CCC) is among the members – has also filed a legal complaint because of Prism, Tempora etc.: http://www.digitale-gesellschaft.ch/2013/07/07/strafanzeige-wegen-verbotenem-nachrichtendienst-bezuglich-prismtempora/ http://www.digitale-gesellschaft.ch/2013/07/07/strafanzeige-... (German) http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.digitale-gesellschaft.ch%2F2013%2F07%2F07%2Fstrafanzeige-wegen-verbotenem-nachrichtendienst-bezuglich-prismtempora%2F http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&pre... (Google translation)

nodata 13y ago

Good on those lawyers. Go them! (Wow. What a turnaround.)

UVB-76 13y ago

I'm glad to see this happening. The programmes are unquestionably a breach of the ECHR; human rights violations on an unprecedented scale. Alas, if the PRISM/Tempora/etc. scandal has taught us one thing, it's that governments consider themselves above the law. Even in the exceptionally unlikely event that these complaints were upheld, and the government were held to account for their actions, the public have no way of verifying the programmes are dismantled, and not reassembled in a different guise. It's over. There is no trust in government anymore.