HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH v. THE UNITED KINGDOM and 4 other applications

Doc ref: 64230/16;64368/16;64741/16;65463/16;65487/16 • ECHR ID: 001-211987

Document date: September 1, 2021

Inbound citations: 0
•
Cited paragraphs: 0
•
Outbound citations: 1

HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH v. THE UNITED KINGDOM and 4 other applications

Doc ref: 64230/16;64368/16;64741/16;65463/16;65487/16 • ECHR ID: 001-211987

Document date: September 1, 2021

Cited paragraphs only

Published on 20 September 2021

FOURTH SECTION

Application no. 64230/16 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH against the United Kingdom and 4 other applications (see list appended) communicated on 1 September 2021

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE

The applicants are a human rights NGO; a journalist; a lawyer; a technologist; and an entrepreneur. The NGO is headquartered in New York with major offices in the United Kingdom, and the individual applicants are all resident in the United Kingdom.

The applicants complain under Articles 8 and 10 of the Convention about the operation of the regime under section 8(4) of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (“the bulk interception regime”). In a judgment dated 16 May 2016 the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (“IPT”) found that they had standing to complain about the bulk interception regime and directed inquiries into whether their communications had been unlawfully intercepted, stored, accessed or retained. However, the IPT subsequently made no determination in their favour.

QUESTION TO THE PARTIES

Is the regime under section 8(4) of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 compatible with Article 8 and/or Article 10 of the Convention?

APPENDIX

No.

Application no.

Case name

Lodged on

Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Nationality

Represented by

64230/16

Human Rights Watch v. the United Kingdom

04/11/2016

Human Rights Watch New York