SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The European Court of Justice has issued a major post-Brexit-decision ruling invalidating the UK's mass surveillance powers:
"General and indiscriminate retention" of emails and electronic communications by governments is illegal, the EU's highest court has ruled, in a judgment that could trigger challenges against the UK's new Investigatory Powers Act – the so-called snooper's charter.
Only targeted interception of traffic and location data in order to combat serious crime – including terrorism – is justified, according to a long-awaited decision by the European court of justice (ECJ) in Luxembourg.
The finding came in response to a legal challenge initially brought by the Brexit secretary, David Davis, when he was a backbench MP, and Tom Watson, Labour's deputy leader, over the legality of GCHQ's bulk interception of call records and online messages.
[...] Daniel Carey, the solicitor from Deighton Pierce Glynn who represented the Open Rights Group and Privacy International, said: "The court is very clear that indiscriminately retaining everyone's metadata is unlawful, which is a point my clients placed particular emphasis on. This prohibition arises out of longstanding EU legislation, which the UK played an important role in creating."
Also at NYT, WSJ, BBC, Bloomberg.
Ruling press release: The Members States may not impose a general obligation to retain data on providers of electronic communications services (PDF)
[Ed's Note: minor edit to first sentence at 232017zDec16]
(Score: 3, Informative) by ledow on Friday December 23 2016, @07:27PM
Can't be post-Brexit as the summary says.
Brexit hasn't started yet, and won't until at least March and won't actually take effect until March 2019 at the earliest.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 23 2016, @07:35PM
Ehhhh, that is really just picky semantics unless there is a significant chance that brexit will not happen. Would their ruling have no teeth post-real-brexit?
(Score: 2) by ledow on Friday December 23 2016, @08:37PM
It means the ruling is law for the next two years, minimum, and then will be absorbed into UK law.
Then it would be up to Parliament to repeal that UK-inherited-from-the-EU law specifically.
So it does matter - it says that this ruling is valid for two years, quite possibly longer.
And there's an election in 2-and-a-bit year's time...
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday December 23 2016, @08:50PM
I'm pretty sure the UK and almost any other sovereign nation can simply ignore such rulings or treaties, accepting whatever consequences that come as a result.
That is to say, there is no need to comply with the ECJ, ECHR, Article 50, etc. They are all just formalities.
Who is going to use economic sanctions or war to threaten the UK?
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Saturday December 24 2016, @12:11AM
The same can be said of any decision from the Supreme Court, however id be very concerned to live in a country that ignores its judiciary.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday December 24 2016, @01:20PM
unless there is a significant chance that brexit will not happen
This. I wouldn't count Brexit as happening until it happens.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday December 23 2016, @07:39PM
post-Brexit-vote just doesn't have that same ring to it.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 4, Funny) by zocalo on Friday December 23 2016, @08:40PM
See, it's all perfectly clear. :)
And on the subject of "Yes, Minister", and even though it's a bit early, I wonder if I might crave your momentary indulgence in order to discharge a by no means disagreeable obligation which has, over the years, become more or less established practice in government service as we approach the terminal period of the year — calendar, of course, not financial — in fact, not to put too fine a point on it, Week Fifty-One — and submit to you, with all appropriate deference, for your consideration at a convenient juncture, a sincere and sanguine expectation — indeed confidence — indeed one might go so far as to say hope — that the aforementioned period may be, at the end of the day, when all relevant factors have been taken into consideration, susceptible to being deemed to be such as to merit a final verdict of having been by no means unsatisfactory in its overall outcome and, in the final analysis, to give grounds for being judged, on mature reflection, to have been conducive to generating a degree of gratification which will be seen in retrospect to have been significantly higher than the general average.
Or, to put it another way, "Happy Christmas". :)
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
(Score: 2) by fritsd on Friday December 23 2016, @09:42PM
Nitpick: I agree it hasn't started yet, and will probably start March 2017, but it doesn't have to wait until March 2019; that's just the deadline if all goes according to some kind of negotiated orderly procedure. Up to 2 years after triggering.
Also the EU negotiator Barnier has said to expect just 18 months for negotiations (and a month before and several after to get everything signed and worked out by the 27 rEU states)
http://www.politico.eu/article/michel-barnier-uk-will-have-18-months-to-secure-brexit-deal-article-50/ [politico.eu]