Published on 30 March 2026
SECOND SECTION
Application no. 15250/24
THE NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR CIVIL LIBERTIES
against the United Kingdom
lodged on 28 May 2024
communicated on 12 March 2026
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The applicant complains about the Convention compliance of various investigatory powers in the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 (“IPA”), which consolidated investigatory powers previously contained in other statutes, including the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. In particular, the applicant complains that the provisions in IPA governing bulk interception warrants, bulk equipment interference warrants, bulk acquisition warrants, authorisations and notices for the retention and obtaining of communications data, targeted equipment interference warrants, and warrants for the retention and examination of bulk personal datasets are not compatible with Article 8 of the Convention. The applicant further claims that the provisions in IPA governing bulk acquisition warrants, authorisations and notices for the retention and obtaining of communications data, targeted equipment interference warrants, and warrants for the retention and examination of bulk personal datasets are not compatible with Article 10 of the Convention.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Having regard to the specific complaints made by the applicant, are the statutory regimes which govern bulk interception warrants, bulk acquisition warrants, bulk equipment interference warrants, authorisations and notices for the retention and obtaining of communications data, targeted equipment interference warrants and warrants for the retention and examination of bulk personal datasets compatible with Article 8 of the Convention?
2. Having regard to the specific complaints made by the applicant, are the statutory regimes which govern bulk acquisition warrants, authorisations and notices for the retention and obtaining of communications data, targeted equipment interference warrants and warrants for the retention and examination of bulk personal datasets compatible with Article 10 of the Convention?
3. To what extent, if at all, are the safeguards identified by the Court in Big Brother Watch and Others, cited above, § 361) in the context of the bulk interception of communications applicable to other (bulk) investigatory powers?
4. What, if any, heightened safeguards are required where the intention is to obtain/access material subject to legal professional privilege, and/or where the obtaining/accessing of such material is highly probable?