Big Brother is Watching

The latest surveillance legislation, the investigatory Powers Act 2016 (IPA), came into force at the beginning of 2017. The highly controversial legislation dubbed ‘The Snoopers Charter’ increased state powers to further monitor our communications. The Act allows for mass surveillance of citizen’s through telecommunication and social media interaction. With these powers the government can authorize the data collection of who, what, when and how we communicate. In addition, the state can obligate providers to decrypt personal information - not only in the UK but in any business around the world which provides modes of communication for UK citizens.

The justification for these extensive powers has been for the protection of national security and prevention of terror. The argument Parliament has presented is that we all must be monitored extensively in the hope of catching a few rogue members of society. For many this seems unnecessary and begs the question as to why government authorized the surveillance of the masses, rather than the select few that security services deem a threat? Even if a person commits no crime the data collected allows the State to have an extremely detailed picture of who you are and your daily life data which can, and may, be used in a great number of ways against your will, without you ever knowing.

There are substantial arguments towards the IPA being in breach of Human Rights. The statute goes beyond the prescribed surveillance guidelines of the European Court of Justice (CJEU) given in case law before the legislation was enacted. Therefore, parliament was aware of the position the CJEU with regard to the limitations on state surveillance.

In the joint cases of Tele2 /Watson, the CJEU Justice ruled that the ‘general and indiscriminate’ retention of data is unlawful and a breach of Article 8. Article 8 is the right to a private life, it is a qualified right meaning it is protected with the exception of where a breach threatens national security is found. The court continued by stating, targeted monitoring must only be used in the prevention and prosecution of serious crime.

The Investigatory Powers Act extends the powers of government beyond this, allowing for the indiscriminate surveillance of citizens communication. Furthermore, within the IPA under s.61(7), the state may use monitored communication for far more serious crimes than the CJEU prohibits, such as collection of taxes, identification of a dead body, public health, market regulation and financial stability. Such broad terms allow the state to use data gathered indiscriminately for whatever purposes suit their agenda without the need for further legislation.

As the UK moves closer to a surveillance state the question becomes, how far will these powers extend? How long will it be before investigatory powers are used on a mass scale to find the status of immigrants, tax evaders and other crimes which may not pose a threat to national security, where the benefits do not justify the extreme loss of freedoms. Unfortunately for those who believe in liberty, these powers are expected to grow with the expanding real or perceived threat of terror. Fueled by fear the state is justifying limiting our freedoms and having an unprecedented watch over the lives of its citizens. Now that Pandora’s Box has been opened it is now a case of minimizing the damage.