Slashdot Mirror
UK's Most Secretive Court Rules GCHQ Mass Internet Surveillance Was Unlawful
Hammeh writes: Today marks the first time in its history that the Investigative Powers Tribunal (IPT), who are responsible for oversight and complaints relating to all of the UK intelligence agencies, upheld a complaint against GCHQ, stating that accessing data provided to them by the NSA was in breach of human rights. The ruling comes as the saga into online privacy continues to unfold. Last year, the same court ruled that internal surveillance of British citizens did not breach human rights. The difference: NSA data is claimed to have sidestepped the protections provided by the UK legal system. The tribunal also noted that although the UK government was willing to admit that Prism and Upstream existed (both NSA programs outed by Edward Snowden), they would not comment on the existence or non-existence of the Tempora program.
But is this going to have any consequences for those who violated the law on a massive scale?
They KNEW they were targetting British people, they even had key journalists as targets. Not terrorists, or 'Jihadists' journalists.
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2015-01/20/gchq-journalist-emails
They KNEW they didn't have legal authority to do a full take on our data. The bill to legalize it was repeatedly pushed by Jacqui Smith and Theresa May and neither got the Snoopers Charter passed.
It failed to pass again a few days ago, as traitors to their country pushed it through on an amendment:
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2015-01/27/snoopers-charter-lords-rejected
GCHQ spied on us for a foreign power anyway.
They spied for the NSA on British communications and undermined our democracy. There needs to be f**ing prosecutions.
Every politicians now has an NSA file filled with GCHQ provided information.
Every potential poltician has an NSA file filled with GCHQ provided information.
Every journalist has an NSA file filled with GCHQ provided information.
They undermined us, there needs to be criminal prosecutions and the man who went ahead with this despite the law failing to pass, he needs to be prosecuted as the spy he is. He's a spy just as if he was a Russian spy working for the Russians or a Chinese spy working for the Chinese.
And when the NSA/CIA/US Politicos use that data to leverage UK politicians to keep GCHQ spying on Brits, you GCHQ staff will know you are traitors to Britain. YOU DID THIS. You created those files that let them leverage the UK political machine. Where is the Snowden among you, that had the balls to stand up and tell us of all this illegal activity??
And as for the US, now you can see that General Alexander sent staff to the UK to get around the US laws and spy on Americans using Tempora. He's walked away from this free as a bird, even has a consultancy, he flat out lied about spying on Americans too.
Read this:
http://boingboing.net/2015/02/05/ron-wyden-to-eric-holder-befo.html
Understand that Wyden is telling you that he cannot discuss these secret commercial deals that were struck between US corporations and the NSA to hand over all their private data. US citizens too, and no doubt all of Europes.
So all the 'cookies' nonsense, the EU got stuck with, meanwhile the NSA was cutting financial deals with the Facebook/Google/Yahoo/Microsoft/DropBox/Apple's of this world to get all of the private data. THEY got a business subsidy, and NSA got everyone's private data.
So everyone of you now has a leverage file against you, and we cannot trust our politicians to act for their countries because of it. That goes for US politicians too, because the files will be used to prevent politicians that don't fit the military industrial complex from rising up to rule.
Are we finally going to start seeing courts saying that the 5 eyes cheating to get around the legalities of spying on their own people by having other governments do it is a terrible idea?
Because that would be fucking awesome. When a government has been told "you can't do this" and "this is your evidentiary standard" -- to subsequently say "well, we got it this way, it was they who broke the law so it's OK" -- well that's pretty douchebaggy.
I would dearly love to see courts saying "Gee, the NSA has broken our law, and no matter if they think it's legal it isn't".
These assholes have decided they have no jurisdiction, and I'd like to see someone remind them that they do.
The world hasn't consented to be spied on by the NSA, so I'd love to see them and their counterparts brought up onto shorter leashes. Or shorter ropes.
They're like dogs who bite, if you don't get that under control you might have to put them down. And if they're going to sidestep the law, then they definitely should be put down.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Legal vs. Illegal is not really the point. This is more like something I would expect from the Stasi in a police state rather than something that is going on in a supposed Democracy with supposed constitutional protections. Yes Slashdot, there is something to see here, don't move along.
A brain is a terrible thing to waste... Mind? That's debatable.
National espionage agencies operate outside the law these days anyway.
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
No, it's time to apply the law.
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
No again, it's time to recognize that the law means nothing when it comes to government spying.
No, its the traitors who did it and kept it secret.
When General Alexander went into Congress and told them the NSA doesn't routinely collect data on Americans, knowing full well he was a lying toerag, how is Congress supposed to then pass laws based on these lies?
Tempora isn't even being admitted to, its secret to the MPs in the House of Commons and only a few Lords involved in this program, (and now frantically trying to legalize it) are aware of it. How is Parliament supposed to pass laws on this secret policy based on the lies they were told?
When GCHQ staff accessed PRISM and realized that the NSA was spying on all British comms, their duty was to the people of Britain to expose this and protect our data. Instead they shut up, crawled into their cubby holes and did their work for the NSA like the spies they are.
THEY take the blame. It was THEIR doing.
And when NSA analysts were sent to the UK to get around US law and access the full-take Tempora data, their duty was to expose this and protect the US data, even if its from an out of control AMERICAN General, it makes zero difference. Their duty is to the people and the country and its laws NOT THEIR BOSS.
And people think that the Illuminati isn't real.....
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
they would not comment on the existence or non-existence of the Tempora program.
That's because it's actually the tempura program, and no-one wants that taken away from them.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
Can 'the law' be a euphemism for a hollow point bullet? Please?
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Some links to pages describing Tempora.
I think the fact that UK Defence officials issued a Defence Advisory Notice to the BBC requesting they don't mention certain espionage programs, which may-or-may-not exist, basically confirms that they in fact do exist. It's damn near an official acknowledgement even. Same goes for the US Army restricting personel access to The Guardian website since they started mentionain PRISM and Tempora. Well done chaps!
Human Rights, Article 12: Freedom from Interference with Privacy, Family, Home and Correspondence
I mean, in a sardonic way. They go to such great lengths to say "IT'S ILLEGAL!!!" and "THEY CAN'T DO THAT". They dance around, yell about all this, and they're doing that so that you won't notice something conspicuous in its absence: consequences.
Imagine if you robbed a liquor store and went to court and the judge yelled about how it's illegal to rob liquor stores, you should have known that, yes, you, liquor store robber! You law breaker! Scoundrel! You're terrible, I can't believe you robbed the liquor store. Okay, you can leave now, just don't rob any more liquor stores because it's illegal to do that!
It's ludicrous, really. We need to understand that these issues are far more serious than people knocking off liquor stores and it's time we started treating it as such. Real consequences for those who broke the law - and I don't mean the minimum security marriott.
Do you have ESP?
But we all knew that.
However: will anyone DO anything about it?
Does Scotland have to secede to get your attention?
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
I believe those are better known as bread and circuses.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Consequences to a government agency are not and should not be the same as they are for an individual... When a great wrong has been done by an individual, punishment is arguably useful and usually satisfying from other individuals perspective, but retribution for an organisation (esp government) it's not very useful to anyone.
Also the legality of this ruling should not determine punishment or justification, it should determine change. If the ruling was "lawful", then clearly the laws involved are not comprehensive enough or are poorly defined.
Whatever the ruling, it's clear that the GCHQ overreached. Inadequate oversight, bad policy and fallible laws could be the cause. The ruling and findings along the way can provide insight into how much of each is to blame.
Consequences to a government agency are not and should not be the same as they are for an individual... When a great wrong has been done by an individual, punishment is arguably useful and usually satisfying from other individuals perspective, but retribution for an organisation (esp government) it's not very useful to anyone.
It depends. Many of us have argued for an official corporate "death penalty", and the government here (US) actually does shut down businesses sometimes and courts often order the people who set up scam businesses to never engage in that sort of business again. Ultimately action needs to be taken against individuals, though.
Also the legality of this ruling should not determine punishment or justification, it should determine change. If the ruling was "lawful", then clearly the laws involved are not comprehensive enough or are poorly defined.
Whatever the ruling, it's clear that the GCHQ overreached. Inadequate oversight, bad policy and fallible laws could be the cause. The ruling and findings along the way can provide insight into how much of each is to blame.
Which is why - in the case of governmental misconduct - *individuals* need to be held accountable, including hard time in prison. That way, next time a higher up at [spy agency] tells his minions to [break the law], the minions get to say "Hey, Jim did that shit last year and he and his boss are locked up in a maximum security prison for the next 10 years. I'll pass and I'll also be turning you over for prosecution."
Not to invoke Godwin, but following your logic we should have handed out a bunch of harsh rebukes at Nuremberg.
Do you have ESP?