The UK government has a legal framework that justifies secretly monitoring all internet traffic that is routed through foreign companies such as Google, Facebook and Twitter, human rights groups said on Tuesday.
A witness statement from Charles Farr, Director General of the Office for Security and Counter-Terrorism, has disclosed that “indiscriminate” interception is legally permitted if messages are “external communications” through an overseas-based company.
Most large web companies have data centers outside the UK so online activity would involve an external communication.
Farr is the government’s key witness in a case brought by civil liberties groups to determine the level of government internet “snooping” to be heard by the Investigatory Powers Tribunal next month.
In the statement he explains how the Government Communications Headquarters’ mass surveillance program TEMPORA uses the legal framework to spy on communications.
The statement was sent to Liberty, Amnesty International, Privacy International, the American Civil Liberties Union and Pakistani organization Bytes for All. They are involved in a legal challenge to determine how much the UK government is monitoring online activities.
Liberty’s Legal Director James Welch said: “The security services consider that they’re entitled to read, listen and analyze all our communications on Facebook, Google and other US-based platforms. If there was any remaining doubt that UK snooping laws need a radical overhaul, there should be no longer.”
Under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, which regulates the surveillance powers of public bodies, internal communications may only be intercepted under a specific warrant where there is suspicion of unlawful activity. External communications are not subject to the same conditions and maybe intercepted without a warrant.
Amnesty International’s Senior Director for Law and Policy Michael Bochenek said: “British citizens will be alarmed to see their government justifying industrial-scale intrusion into their communications. The public should demand an end to this wholesale violation of their right to privacy.”
A Home Office spokesman said: “We do not comment on ongoing challenges in the Investigatory Powers Tribunal.”
www.aa.com.tr
