Handing down judgment this week in Liberty & Privacy International v Security Service & Anor [2023] UKIPTrib1, the Investigatory Powers Tribunal found ‘very serious failings’ of compliance with legal safeguards dating back as far as 2014. It also found various home secretaries had ignored signs of MI5 breaches and continued unlawfully to sign off on MI5 warrants. MI5 accepted it stored the public’s data improperly and failed to disclose this to the Home Office.
However, the tribunal declined to quash any warrants unlawfully granted.
IPA 2016 gives MI5 and certain other state bodies powers to gather and store large amounts of personal data regardless of whether there are any suspicions about the individuals concerned.
Caroline Wilson Palow, legal director at Privacy International, said: ‘These are not technical breaches. At its highest levels, MI5 systemically disregarded the law, and the Home Office’s failure to do anything green-lighted their activities.’
Megan Goulding, lawyer at Liberty, said the decision showed ‘the so-called safeguards are totally ineffective’.
In January, prior to the judgment, David Anderson KC, the former independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, was appointed by the Home Office to lead an independent review of IPA 2016.
Lord Anderson, of Brick Court Chambers, will assess the case for legislative change. He will look at the effectiveness of the bulk dataset regime, which gives agencies access to personal information, such as travel-related data, about large numbers of individuals. His review also covers the criteria for obtaining internet connection records, the suitability of certain definitions and the ‘resilience and agility of warranty processes’, as well as the oversight regime. He is expected to publish his findings later this year.
