Mass Surveillance in Britain
June 22, 2014
European officials have often acted as though excessive government surveillance was solely an American problem. The recent release of a legal statement from a senior British counterterrorism official, Charles Farr, shows that the United States government is certainly not alone in justifying such practices.
The statement lays out the authority British intelligence agencies claim to have in intercepting communications carried by Internet sites like Google, Facebook and Twitter, even if those messages are between people located within the country. It says the government can legally sift through and read emails, Internet searches and other activity on those services because they are “external communications” — provided by foreign companies — for the purposes of British law. (“Internal communications,” like domestic phone calls and text messages, however, cannot be intercepted unless the officials first obtain a warrant based on suspicion of illegal activity.)
Mr. Farr’s statement was filed as part of the British government’s response to alegal case brought by Privacy International, Amnesty International and other public interest groups against the government. The groups are trying to stop the bulk collection of communications data by intelligence agencies.
The government neither admits nor denies that it is conducting mass surveillance on Britons, according to the statement. But it is hard to believe that officials would concoct this “external communications” rationale for bulk data collection if they did not intend to amass and sift through the information. Next month, theInvestigatory Powers Tribunal, a British court, will hold hearings in which Mr. Farr and others are expected to testify. The court has usually ruled in favor of the government, and it usually operates in secret. This time, however, the hearings will be open to the public, providing an important forum for this issue.
Privacy groups are asking the court to shut down mass surveillance. If the court rules in favor of the government, the groups are prepared to go to the European Court of Justice, the highest court of the European Union. In April, that courtstruck down a European Union directive that required communications companies to retain data about their customers for up to two years so governments could have access to the information.
European governments have been more serious about protecting consumer privacy against Internet companies and advertisers than the United States has been. But many countries, like Britain, Germany and France, have given law enforcement and intelligence agencies a free hand to monitor private communications, according to a recent report from the Center for Democracy & Technology. Given what has been learned about government surveillance in the last year, courts in Europe should make sure government officials meet a high burden of proof before they get access to private communications.
No comments:
Post a Comment