DRIPA surveillance ruled unlawful

The government failed to win its appeal against Tom Watson MP’s challenge to the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act (DRIPA) this week, in Home Secretary v Watson [2018] EWCA Civ 70. The court held that the Act breached EU law on data protection since it allowed access to individuals’ phone and internet data for purposes beyond that of fighting serious crime, and let police and public bodies authorise their own access rather than submitting requests to a court or independent body.

DRIPA expired at the end of 2016, but the powers were largely replicated in the Investigatory Powers Act 2016, also known as the ‘Snooper’s Charter’. 

Civil rights organisation Liberty, which represented Watson in the case, is bringing a separate challenge to the Investigatory Powers Act later this year in the High Court.

Martha Spurrier, Liberty’s director, said: ‘Yet again a UK court has ruled the government’s extreme mass surveillance regime unlawful.

‘This judgment tells ministers in crystal clear terms that they are breaching the public’s human rights. The latest incarnation of the Snoopers’ Charter, the Investigatory Powers Act, must be changed.’

The case was referred to the European Court of Justice, which in 2016 issued a ruling backing the High Court’s decision that the Act contained inadequate protection for individual rights.

Home Office Security and Economic Crime Minister Ben Wallace said: ‘This judgment relates to legislation which is no longer in force and, crucially, [this] judgment does not change the way in which law enforcement agencies can detect and disrupt crimes.

We had already announced that we would be amending the Investigatory Powers Act to address the two areas in which the Court of Appeal has found against the previous data retention regime. We welcome the fact that the Court of Appeal ruling does not undermine the regime and we will continue to defend these vital powers, which Parliament agreed were necessary in 2016, in ongoing litigation.’