Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
privacy international vs ipt (introduction (ipt is the only court which…
privacy international vs ipt
introduction
ipt is the only court which hears scrutiny for the conduct of government bodies such as
GCHQ
IPT was asked by Privacy International to investigate the conduct by GCHQ, particulary in its involvement with hacking inside and outside the UK
February 2016: IPT held that GCHQ action was in accordance with ECHR and lawful under UK law and that such hacking where undertaken only under ‘thematic warrants” (i.e. quite general in scope) would also be lawful. (e.g. “all mobile phones in London”.)
February 2017: High Court (Leggatt J & Sir Brian Leveson) on application of Privacy International for judicial review of the IPT decision regarding thematic warrants, held in favour of IPT
November 2017: Court of Appeal (Sales, Flaux and Floyd LJJ);
CA upheld the High Court’s view that 67(8) denied the opportunity for judicial review.
The UK Supreme Court in March 2018: Supreme Court granted Privacy International permission to appeal.
December 2018: Appeal heard by the Supreme Court; judgment pending.
1 more item...
The Ouster clause
1 more item...
The High Court case revolved around whether the case was applicable for judicial review, held in favour due to s67(8)
High Court and CA judges ruled in favour IPT and did not have a problem with s67(8) because
Date: May 2018
Privacy International is a charity that defends and promotes the right to privacy across the world.
They questioned if the GCHQ's hacking was legal, in line with ECHR.
IPT answered that the hacking was legal under thematic warrants
GCHQ is an intelligence and security organisation responsible for providing signals intelligence (SIGINT) and information assurance to the government and armed forces of the United Kingdom
GCHQ was in great media attention due to its involvement in the NSA mass surveillance/hacking scandal exposed by Snowden
Already has a packed history involving illegal mass surveillance which essentially spied on UK citizens, government claims it is for the interest of national security.
Investigatory Powers Tribunal is the only judicial means to holding the government's secret services to account
the IPT was established by Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA 2000).
This act gave the power and jurisdiction to IPT which made it the only court capable to hear challenges against GCHQ through
In particularly, Section 67 (8)