Written evidence submitted to the Public Bill Committee regarding the Investigatory Powers Bill
CDT recently submitted written evidence to the UK House of Commons Public Bill Committee on the Investigatory Powers Bill. The Committee discusses each provision of the Bill, and decides whether to amend it before the entire House votes. CDT’s evidence, which combines both technical and legal expertise, will help the Committee better understand the harmful consequences of the Bill if it is enacted.
Our evidence makes the following points:
Bulk powers and the power to issue a thematic warrant would violate privacy rights guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights.
Ambiguous language in the Bill would enable the government to demand backdoors for end-to-end encrypted communications. We argue that the Bill should be amended to ensure that end-to-end encryption will not be undermined in this way.
The Bill does not adequately describe which equipment interference (hacking) activities it would permit. This is especially problematic given that bulk equipment interference is permitted. This too would violate European Convention on Human Rights privacy protections.
Judicial Commissioners, who would approve surveillance warrants after the Secretary of State issues them, would not be able to fulfill their judicial role by reviewing the merits of each warrant. We recommend that the Bill be modified so that both the Judicial Commissioner and Secretary of State can review the merits of each warrant, to prevent the abuse of discretion by the executive branch.
British Public Oppose Secret Surveillance Powers and Want Strong Protections for Encrypted Communications
CDT released nationally representative polling data revealing that a the British public are broadly concerned about the security, privacy, and free speech consequences of allowing law enforcement to access encrypted communications.
Responding to the EU-US Negotiations on Reciprocal Data Exchanges for Border Procedures
CDT Europe, together with 29 other civil society organisations and academics, sent an open joint letter to the Council of the EU regarding the worrying direction taken by the European Commission in the EU-US border negotiations with the U.S. government.
Open Joint Letter on a Public Reassessment of the EU-US Adequacy Decision
On 29 June, the US Supreme Court ruled that US President Trump can remove the leaders of independent agencies and commissions, overturning nearly 90 years of precedent limiting executive power. This decision raises serious questions about one of the key safeguards underpinning the EU-US Data Privacy Framework adopted in 2023: independent supervision.
