Report Calls for Reevaluation of British Electronic Surveillance

A new report suggests that Britain needs to reevaluate its
electronic surveillance laws.
Image:  Shutterstock

An independent report released last Thursday suggested that it’s time for Britain to change its surveillance laws, both to provide security and to maintain the privacy of individuals.

Senior lawyer David Anderson argued that Britain’s current legislation on electronic surveillance is “incomprehensible to all but a tiny band of initiates” and that these laws are “without statutory safeguards.”

The 373-page report, which took almost a year to complete, arrives at a time when Britain is struggling with increased security threats and privacy concerns, in particular the release of documents two years ago by Edward Snowden, formerly a contractor with the National Security Agency.

Anderson’s report calls for the creation of an Independent Surveillance and Intelligence Commission to oversee other intelligence agencies and restore public faith in these institutions.  This Commission would determine authorization for surveillance warrants—a big difference from the organizational structure suggested by the currently-debated “snoopers charter,” which would allow the government to extract even more data from internet service providers about who users call, text, instant message, and engage with on social media.

Home Secretary Theresa May said the report’s findings would be considered but did not commit to acting on them.

"Each intrusive power must be shown to be necessary, clearly spelled out in law, limited in accordance with international human rights standards and subject to demanding and visible safeguards," Anderson said. "The current law is fragmented, obscure, under constant challenge, and variable in the protections that it affords the innocent. It is time for a clean slate."

For some, these are welcome insights.  Cian Murphy, a legal expert at King’s College, London, noted that “the report acknowledges the challenges—for both privacy and security—in the current law and sets out a blueprint for a new legal architecture.  It gives Britain the best possible chance for effective and proportionate powers, in compliance with the law and protective of civil liberties.”

Because Britain is so influential in terms of how other European countries set up their own intelligence agency procedures, the legal outcome of this debate will be extremely important.