An emergency hearing at the European Union is scheduled on the 12th of April 2016 regarding the recent adoptation of the Investigatory Powers Bill in the United Kingdom on its compatibility with EU law.
EU wants to reconsider the legality of the bill, also known as IP Bill, Surveillance Bill or Snoopers Charter, by opposing bodies. The emergency hearing could end with EU limiting the power of the UK Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) surveillance body.
The hearing next month will be attended by lawmaker and Conservative member of parliament David Davis.
The IP Bill was first introduced last November 2015 by U.K. parliament Home Secretary Theresa May, with the intention of passing a legislation that builds a strong foundation and extend the surveillance capabilities of domestic intelligence and law enforcement agencies to keep pace with tech developments. According to Tech Crunch, the bill paves the way for transparent legal framework for the operation of secret state surveillance powers.
UK Home Secretary Theresa May has defended the bill, claiming it prioritizes privacy and limits intrusiveness into personal data. Aside from that, UK police and intelligence services can have surveillance powers; meaning they have the authority to hack mobile gadgets and computers. Moreover, internet providers will be allowed to store their customers' browsing history for up to 12 months and grant access to law enforcement regardless of whether a user is under investigation or not.
The Bill was passed last March 15, 2016 with 281 votes and 15 against. It is currently at the committee stage hearing for further discussions.
Prior to the passing of the IP bill, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has previously ruled against UK government's surveillance legislation in 2014. UK's Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014 (DRIPA) was ruled to be inconsistent with EU laws after hearings were held, as reported in Sputnik News. This hearing was also scrutinized by David Davis, the lawmaker who will be taking the IP Bill for further investigations this April.
What is the opposition's view to the IP bill?
According to CDT, the ECJ has judged the bill as a violation to the European Convention on Human Rights because of the insufficient oversight that the bill can offer. Unlike normal investigations, the IP bill does not need a judge's evaluation for a search warrant and supporting evidences. Amendments that would need an independent judicial authorization for surveillance warrants were suggested in order to strengthen oversight.
Labour MP Keir Starmer said, "There is a requirement for extended powers. But just as powers are extended so must safeguards be - and this must be the absolute governing principle, I think - from the Labour party point of view, from any point of view... The safeguards have to be more robust, more transparent than they were before."
© 2023 Lawyer Herald All rights reserved. Do not reproduce without permission.
Get the Most Popular Lawyerherald Stories in a Weekly Newsletter
Join the Discussion
Related Articles
