British ministers answer for GCHQ mass surveillance in European court
by alethoRT | January 24, 2014
The
court in Strasbourg has ordered British ministers to provide
submissions on mass surveillance programs by the UK’s spy agency to find
out whether GCHQ's secret activities went against the European
convention on human rights.
Four
European civil rights groups filed a case against Government
Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) at the European Court of Human Rights
over its surveillance methods in September, after being denied the
chance to challenge its practices in an open court in the UK.
The UK's Big Brother Watch, English PEN and Open Rights Group, as well as the German internet activism group, Constanze Kurz, accused GCHQ of violating
the European Convention of Human Rights, insisting that alleged hacking
of vast amounts of online data, emails and social media breached
Article 8 of the Convention, which guarantees European citizens the
right to a private family life. Their case refers to two surveillance
programs by the domestic spying agency, Prism and Tempora. The
campaigners, who teamed up under the umbrella title of Privacy Not
Prism, claimed that GCHQ has "illegally intruded on the privacy of
millions of British and European citizens.”
In
line with the data revealed by former US National Security Agency,
Edward Snowden, about the mass surveillance programs operated by the US
and Britain, the group said that "GCHQ has the capacity to collect more
than 21 petabytes of data a day – equivalent to sending all the
information in all the books in the British Library 192 times every 24
hours." Meanwhile, under UK law, intelligence agencies are supposed to
seek permission from the Secretary of State to read an individual's text
messages.
The
European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has ordered the British
government to provide their submissions by May, and the campaigners
expect the court to make a ruling before the end of the year.
According
to the lawyer for the groups, the ECHR has acted "remarkably quickly"
communicating the case to the British government.
"It
has also acted decisively by requiring the government to explain how
the UK's surveillance practices and oversight mechanisms comply with the
right to privacy. This gives hope the ECHR will require reform if the
government continues to insist that nothing is wrong," Daniel Carey told
the Guardian.
Both GCHQ and British ministers have insisted that none of their intelligence programs violated privacy laws and human rights.
According
to GCHQ, all of its work is "carried out in accordance with a strict
legal and policy framework which ensures that our activities are
authorized, necessary and proportionate, and that there is rigorous
oversight, including from the secretary of state, the interception and
intelligence Services commissioners and the parliamentary intelligence
and security committee."
Foreign
Secretary William Hague has continuously dismissed allegations that
GCHQ breached the law, saying law-biding citizens have no reason
whatsover to be alarmed.
"If
we could tell the whole world and the whole country how we do this
business, I think people would be enormously reassured by it and they
would see that the law-abiding citizen has nothing to worry about," he
said in June.
"If
we did that, it would defeat the objective - this is secret work, it is
secret intelligence, it is secret for a reason, and a reason that is to
do with protecting all the people of this country," Mr Hague explained.
Last week a joint investigation conducted by the UK's Guardian newspaper and Channel 4 News, and based on the new documents leaked by Snowden, revealed that the NSA created a secret system called Dishfire
to collect hundreds of millions of text messages a day. The documents
showed that GCHQ had used the NSA database to search the metadata of
"untargeted and unwarranted" communications of people in the UK.
According to the Guardian report, "The NSA has made extensive use of its
vast text message database to extract information on people's travel
plans, contact books, financial transactions and more - including of
individuals under no suspicion of illegal activity."
No comments:
Post a Comment