Press releases

Press releases

ORG's response to IPT ruling that UK intelligence sharing was unlawful

Today the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT) found that the secret intelligence sharing between the UK and the US were unlawful prior to December 2014 because the policies governing these arrangements were secret. These policies were made public last December during a case brought by Privacy International, Bytes for All, Liberty, and Amnesty International.

Open Rights Group strongly welcomes the highly significant ruling, which is the first time the IPT has found the UK’s intelligence services to be in breach of human rights law. 

However, the finding relates to historic practices only. The IPT has already said it believes intelligence sharing is currently lawful, since the disclosure of the secret policies during the IPT proceedings. In the same December judgment, the IPT also found that GCHQ’s TEMPORA programme of mass surveillance is in accordance with the law.

 Elizabeth Knight, Legal Director at Open Rights Group commented,

“This ruling is a very welcome first step. It shows that secret polices are not an acceptable basis for highly intrusive intelligence sharing practices. However, the IPT has not gone far enough. These flimsy policies are not enough to comply with the requirements of human rights law, even now they are public. And GCHQ’s own TEMPORA programme of mass interception is clearly both unlawful and disproportionate. We hope the European Court of Human Rights will go further than the IPT and find that mass surveillance breaches our human right to privacy.”

Open Rights Group has an application pending at the European Court of Human Rights, which challenges both intelligence sharing and GCHQ’s TEMPORA programme based on non-specific, blanket warrants. The case, brought along with Big Brother Watch, English PEN and Constanze Kurz, has been on hold awaiting the outcome of the IPT case. The case will soon proceed now the IPT has given its ruling.

[Read more]

ORG responds to Cameron's call for legal powers to break encryption

Open Rights Group has called on the Prime Minister to provide more details about his plans to give the security services the legal powers to break encrypted communications.

Executive Director Jim Killock said:

'Cameron’s plans appear dangerous, ill-thought out and scary. Having the power to undermine encryption will have consequences for everyone’s personal security. It could affect not only our personal communications but also the security of sensitive information such as bank records, making us all more vulnerable to criminal attacks.’

[Read more]

Press release: Permission granted for judicial review of DRIPA

A judicial review of the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act (DRIPA) has been granted permission by Mr Justice Lewis in the High Court today. Open Rights Group (ORG) and Privacy International (PI) intervened in the case, which was brought by Tom Watson MP and David Davis MP, represented by Liberty. ORG and PI have now been given permission to make further submissions in advance of the next hearing. 

Legal Director Elizabeth Knight said:

“After the Court of Justice of the EU declared the Data Retention Directive invalid, the UK government had the opportunity to design new legislation that would protect human rights. It chose instead to circumvent the decision of the CJEU by introducing the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act (DRIPA), which is almost identical to the Data Retention Directive. 

Through our submission, we hope to help demonstrate that DRIPA breaches our fundamental human right to privacy and does not comply with human rights and EU law."

ORG's submission addresses the EU data protection regime in place before the Data Retention Directive (in particular the Data Protection Directive, the E-privacy Directive and the E-Commerce Directive) and why we consider DRIPA does not comply with the requirements of the regime in light of the clear guidance from the CJEU. 

Dan Carey of Deighton Pierce Glynn solicitors, Jessica Simor QC (Matrix), Ravi Mehta of counsel (Blackstone) and Hugh Tomlinson QC (Matrix) are acting for ORG. 

About the judicial review: On 22 July Tom Watson MP and David Davis MP announced that they were pursuing judicial review proceedings, on the grounds of on Article 8 ECHR and Articles 7 and 8 European Charter of Fundamental Rights. They are represented by Liberty. Permission was granted by the High Court (Administrative Court) today, which means that the case will proceed to a substantive hearing.

[Read more]

Open Rights Group response to the Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill

Executive Director, Jim Killock said:

“Despite the Court of Justice of the European Union ruling that blanket data retention interferes with our right to privacy, the government is expanding the amount of personal information that companies are forced to keep. Rather than rushing through counter-terror legislation, as they rushed through DRIPA, politicians need to ask whether pervasive whole population profiling is justified.  Undoubtedly surveillance must be used to tackle the the threat of terrorism but it should be targeted and proportionate.”

On proposals to record IP addresses and port numbers, Killock added: 

"In expecting companies to spend millions on recording IP addresses, they are embedding DRIPA and RIPA, both of which are supposed to be reviewed in just over 12 months. They are also dealing with a problem that exists because the mobile companies continue to rely on out of date technology that means hundreds of people use the same IP addresses. The government ought to be asking providers to invest in IPv6, rather than upgrading their current, limited technology, just for the purposes of further logging our movements. "

ORG has also pointed out that parts of the legislation aimed at preventing extremism in educational and other institutions, “are so open-ended that they could easily lead to work-place surveillance, where employers would be obliged by guidelines to check their employees’ email and web history.”

For more information, please email, 020 7096 1079

[Read more]

ISC report into Lee Rigby's murder is misleading

Reacting to today’s ISC report, the Open Rights Group said that their report into Lee Rigby's murder is misleading. Executive Director Jim Killock said:

“When the intelligence services are gathering data about every one of us but failing to act on intelligence about individuals, they need to get back to basics, and look at the way they conduct targeted investigations.

“The committee should not use the appalling murder of Fusilier Rigby as an excuse to justify the further surveillance and monitoring of the entire UK population. To pass the blame to internet companies is to use Fusilier Rigby’s murder to make cheap political points.

“The committee is particularly misleading when it implies that US companies do not co-operate, and it is quite extraordinary to demand that companies pro-actively monitor email content for suspicious material. Internet companies cannot and must not become an arm of the surveillance state.

“As the report admits, ‘lone wolf attacks’ are almost impossible to predict - and therefore difficult to prevent. The security services should focus their efforts on the targeted surveillance of individuals like Michael Adebolajo rather than continuing to monitor every citizen in the UK. 

“Mass surveillance erodes the basic trust between citizen and state by treating us all as suspects. If the government keeps finding new ways to justify indiscriminate whole population trawls, it will be fair to say that we have lost our liberty and the terrorists have won.”


[Read more]

Tech companies must come clean about their role in enabling blanket surveillance

Open Rights Group has responded to a report by Channel 4 News that Cable & Wireless allowed GCHQ to scoop up the private communications of millions of people around the world.

Executive Director Jim Killock said: 

"Tech companies are hiding their role in enabling blanket collection. It's time for them to come clean and tell us how they work with the security services and how much of our data they have shared.  UK warrants are simply not designed to allow everyone's data to be collected, all of the time. They are meant to permit targeted collection."

He added: 

"We are being denied a democratic debate. Parliament needs to decide on the limits of the law through a full debate on our broken surveillance regime.”


[Read more]

ORG calls for political parties to state their position on surveillance

At their annual conference, ORGCon14, Open Rights Group (ORG) have called on politicians to address surveillance by the police and security services in their manifestos for May's General Election. The digital campaigners believe that a big increase in ORG's membership over the last year and a half shows that surveillance is becoming a key issue for voters. They are calling on political parties to state their policies so that the electorate can make an informed choice about who will protect their rights to privacy and free speech.

ORG’s Executive Director Jim Killock said:

“The Government has failed to debate the issues but we know that the public wants and needs to hear about what is happening with privacy and free speech online.”

Speakers at the conference included the Liberal Democrat MP for Cambridge Julian Huppert, who urged delegates to apply pressure on MP candidates in the run up to the General Election. He said: “There is a profound problem with politicians. A lot just don't get it [digital issues] so take very simplistic views....Fear is incredibly powerful and you do have to work hard to change it.”

With regard to comments made by GCHQ Director Robert Hannigan that tech companies should do more to fight terrorism, Labour MEP Claude Moraes said it was, “outrageous for a civil servant to be making those statements”. He added: “I want our politicians in the run up to the General Election to have a mature debate ... rather than a positioning debate.”

The Leader of the Green Party, Natalie Bennett said:

“While we're talking about digital rights, we're also talking about rights and don't protect freedom, democracy, rights by destroying them...that really needs to be challenged.”

ORG is calling for an end to the blanket surveillance of our personal communications and new legislation that would make the security services accountable to Parliament.

ORGCon is ORG's annual conference where high profile writers, speakers and activists give their insights into the big issues affecting civil liberties and the Internet. The event was attended by over 450 people and took place over two days in London.

[Read more]

ORG response to extremist sites being blocked by ISP web filters

Open Rights Group has responded to the announcement that ISPs will add extremist websites to filters designed to protect children from seeing adult content. Jim Killock, Executive Director, Open Rights Group said:

"We need transparency whenever political content is blocked even when we are talking about websites that espouse extremist views. The government must be clear about what sites they think should be blocked, why they are blocking them and whether there will be redress for site owners who believe that their website has been blocked incorrectly."

He added:

"Given the low uptake of filters, it is difficult to see how effective the government’s approach will be when it comes to preventing young people from seeing material they have deemed inappropriate. Anyone with an interest in extremist views can surely find ways of circumventing child friendly filters.

For more information, please contact

[Read more]

Open Rights Group: RIPA not fit for purpose

Further evidence that the Regulatory of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA) is being used to violate the rights of UK citizens was exposed today. Documents released by human rights organisation, Reprieve  show that GCHQ and MI5 staff were told they could target lawyers’ communications. This undermines legal privilege that ensures communications between lawyers and their clients are confidential. 

The news that legal privilege is being violated comes weeks after it was revealed the Met police have used RIPA to circumvent journalistic privilege that protects journalists’ sources. 

Open Rights Group’s Legal Director, Elizabeth Knight said:

‘We already know that RIPA allows the security services to intercept all ‘external’ communications, breaching our right to privacy. By undermining journalistic and legal privilege, RIPA also threatens our rights to free speech and a fair trial. The government cannot keep defending these abuses. We need urgent reform of this broken law now. This disclosure demonstrates the need to introduce judicial authorisation.’ 

For more information, contact

[Read more]

Open Rights Group response to GCHQ Director's claim that tech companies are aiding terrorists

Open Rights Group has responded to an FT comment piece by the Director of GCHQ, Robert Hannigan, in which he calls for “greater co-operation from technology companies', who are in his words, “the command and control networks of choice” for terrorists.

Executive Director Jim Killock said:

“Robert Hannigan's comments are divisive and offensive. If tech companies are becoming more resistant to GCHQ's demands for data, it is because they realise that their customers' trust has been undermined by the Snowden revelations. It should be down to judges, not GCHQ nor tech companies, to decide when our personal data is handed over to the intelligence services. If Hannigan wants a 'mature debate' about privacy, he should start by addressing GCHQ's apparent habit of gathering the entire British population's data rather than targeting their activities towards criminals.”

For more information, email

[Read more]