Landmark UK surveillance case to be heard in Strasbourg today

The case, described by campaigners as a “watershed moment for people’s privacy and freedom of expression across the world”, is being brought by Amnesty International, Liberty, Privacy International, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism among others.

The case is the latest stage in an effort from the organisations to challenge the UK’s surveillance powers following revelations by the US whistleblower Edward Snowden.

In 2013, Mr Snowden revealed how the UK’s GCHQ intelligence agency was secretly intercepting and processing millions of private communications of ordinary people on a daily basis (the “Tempora” programme), and - without a clear legal foundation or proper safeguards - sharing data with the USA’s National Security Agency, as well as other countries’ intelligence agencies.

The Strasbourg case is a test of the lawfulness of the UK’s continued blanket gathering and use of online data. In December 2014, the Investigatory Powers Tribunal - the UK court which has jurisdiction over GCHQ, MI5 and MI6 - ruled that these practices may in principle comply with the UK’s human rights obligations, a finding that is the subject of this challenge. However, in February 2015 the Tribunal ruled the UK government’s access to US surveillance had been in breach of human rights law prior to the legal proceedings.

The case is expected to have wide-ranging implications for last year’s Investigatory Powers Act, which changed the UK’s legal framework governing surveillance matters, allowing for further blanket surveillance.

Martha Spurrier, Director of Liberty, said: “Our organisations exist to stand up for people and challenge abuse of power. We work with whistleblowers, victims, lawyers, journalists and campaigners around the world, so confidentiality and protection of our sources is vital.”

She added: “Losing our privacy is the gateway to losing everything that keeps us free - the right to protest, to a fair trial, to practise our religion, to think and speak freely. No country that deploys industrial-scale state surveillance has ever remained a rights-respecting democracy.

“We now look to the court to uphold our rights where our government has failed to do so.”