BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
European Court of Human Rights |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Big Brother Watch and Others v. the United Kingdom - 58170/13 - Legal Summary [2014] ECHR 178 (07 January 2014) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2014/178.html Cite as: [2014] ECHR 178 |
||
[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. 170
January 2014
Big Brother Watch and Others v. the United Kingdom - 58170/13
See: [2014] ECHR 93
Article 8
Article 8-1
Respect for private life
Indiscriminate capture and sharing of vast quantities of communication data by state security services: communicated
The applicants are three non-governmental organisations based in London and an academic based in Berlin, all of whom work internationally in the fields of privacy and freedom of expression. Their applications to the Court were triggered by media coverage, following the leak of information by Edward Snowden, a former systems administrator with the United States National Security Agency (NSA), about the use by the United States of America and the United Kingdom of technologies permitting the indiscriminate capture of vast quantities of communication data and the sharing of such data between the two States.
The applicants allege that they are likely to have been the subject of generic surveillance by the UK Government Communications Head Quarters (GCHQ) and/or that the UK security services may have been in receipt of foreign intercept material relating to their electronic communications. They contend that the resulting interference with their rights under Article 8 of the Convention were not “in accordance with the law”. In their submission, there is no basis in domestic law for the receipt of information from foreign intelligence agencies and an absence of legislative control and safeguards in relation to the circumstances in which the UK intelligence services can request foreign intelligence agencies to intercept communications and/or to give the UK access to stored data that has been obtained by interception, and the extent to which the UK intelligence services can use, analyse, disseminate and store data solicited and/or received from foreign intelligence agencies and the process by which such data must be destroyed.
Further, in relation to the interception of communications directly by GCHQ, the applicants submit that the statutory regime applying to external communications warrants does not comply with the minimum standards outlined by the Court in its case-law.
Lastly, they contend that the generic interception of external communications by GCHQ, merely on the basis that such communications have been transmitted by transatlantic fibre-optic cables, is an inherently disproportionate interference with the private lives of thousands, perhaps millions, of people.
Communicated under Article 8 of the Convention.
