Liberty and Privacy International v Security Service [2023] UKIPTrib1- MI5 admitted to have been using personal data unlawfully without application of safeguards of retention, review and disposal

MI5 admitted that personal data had been unlawfully processed and retained between the period of 2016 and 2019 due to failures in retention, review and destruction practicies.

See pg.79 of the open judgment for a summary of the failings of MI5 in their handling of personal data in particular.

For further, more detailed, context regarding the case see the Privacy International press release.

Attorney General v BBC [2022] EWHC 1189 (QB) – High Court considers what information can be made public about alleged MI5 CHIS

In a judgment handed down on 18 May 2022 the High Court has considered what information be BBC can publish in a story pertaining to the actions of an alleged MI5 covet human intelligence source (“CHIS”).

The BBC alleged that X was a CHIS and had been psychologically and sexually abusive to two female partners.

The judgment can be found here: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2022/1189.html

The judgment is in two parts- one heard in public and the other in private. The private hearing was held to be necessary so that the Court could hear submissions about information that, if released to the public, would make the identity of the alleged CHIS known.

Mr Justice Chamberlian comments: “The court must be alert to the possibility of “jigsaw” identification. One piece of information may on its own seem innocuous, but when taken together with other information known to a particular malign actor, it may lead to the identification of an individual with greater or lesser confidence. The threat of jigsaw identification is a familiar feature of arguments against disclosure in closed material proceedings in the national security context. It is regularly deployed as a basis for refusing to disclose information known only from covert sources. But, although the court must be alive to the threat of jigsaw identification, it must also be astute not to allow the threat to justify a blanket prohibition on disclosure of any piece of the jigsaw.

at p.24

The BBC’s article on the case can be found here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61528286

The intial BBC coverage of this matter here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61508520

And details of one of X’s former partners’ legal action to be taken against MI5 here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61521569

Citation: The access of mobile phones by the police – Owen Bowcott, The Guardian

The Guardian has posted on Privacy International’s recent challenge to mobile phone interception by the police force.

The issue centers around the extraction of data from mobile phones by the force. Software is used to download the files stored on the accessed mobile devices. NGO Privacy International is challenging the invasiveness and proportionality of the practice in harvesting personal data in the course of investigations.

red smartphone on white surface

The outcome of the case will have significant repercussions for mobile data privacy and mobile developments. Mobile privacy has been a hot topic issue since the US Apple vs. FBI encryption case in relation to the investigation of the San Bernadino Shootings in 2016. We will have coverage of the case once judgment is handed down.

The privacy implications of using facial recognition software

The use of facial recognition software (“FRS”) in security and monitoring was thrust into the spotlight by the London Mayor Sadiq Khan, taking issue with a London developer over its installation in a King’s Cross site. In this post on the Privacy Perspective we consider the privacy and data protection issues with integrating FRS into security systems, an issue currently before the courts. Continue reading

Big brother is watching you, in compliance with the European Convention of Human Rights

Revisiting the case of Big Brother Watch and Others v. the United Kingdom

The operation of the UK’s surveillance services, MI5, MI6, GCHQ and the Metropolitan Police Service and their interaction with human rights (“Convention rights”) have historically been obscure to safeguard the interests of national security. The specifics of policy and practices when conducting national surveillance and its interaction with the private lives citizens have only come to light since the whistleblowing of Edward Snowden in 2013, catalyzing closer scrutiny of their potential to impinge upon the democratic freedoms.

Continue reading