Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

UK’s mass surveillance regime violated human rights law, finds ECHR

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 62 posts

Re: UK’s mass surveillance regime violated human rights law, finds ECHR

#31

Post by Quanttek »

gsnedders wrote: post #13
boomboomsubban wrote: post #6

Is this the end of the case or is there some future sentencing? I find it hard to believe they weren't aware the programs violated human rights law, and I'm not sure what we're hoping a court confirming it's bad will accomplish.

Any penalties against the treaty signatories are done when the the judgment is made final, either by three months elapsing or by the Grand Chamber declining a request for referral or appeal, or ultimately by the Grand Chamber publishing a judgment (and that is by definition final). This judgment was published by the (lower) Chamber of the Court, so we likely have a while to go yet. The important point is the judgment…

Exactly: The countries signing the convention agreed to its binding force but, except for fines, the ECtHR doesn't have direct to order countries. That actually foes for most judiciaries: Courts generally can only order governments to pay fines but these go back into the state budget. Few countries allow officials to be held in contempt of courts. Both, domestic courts and the ECtHR, rely on the respect for the rule of law and, at least for the ECtHR, that has mostly worked out well. Exceptions are Belarussia and Russia

Re: UK’s mass surveillance regime violated human rights law, finds ECHR

#32

Post by ben_w »

theBobBob wrote: post #4
pjc50 wrote: post #2

I have a suspicion that at least part of the drive for Brexit comes from the determination of the British security services to preserve their last little island of unaccountable Empire. There have been conflicts with ECHR over torture, "extraordinary rendition", the treatment of Republicans in Northern Ireland, and (repeatedly) over mass surveillance. One former "M", Richard Dearlove, is an overt Brexit campaigner. (…

The ECHR is completely separate from the EU so no matter what way the actual Brexit goes, they will still be a member of the ECHR. Whether they might want to leave that as well is another matter.

I would say the European Court of Justice is also outside the EU as it also regulates the EEA, but Brexit has meant leaving that too for about two years now.

I know it seems weird and cynical to say a government might not understand what it is and isn’t leaving, but my total lack of faith in the UK government at this point means I’ve chosen to leave the country rather than risk it.

Re: UK’s mass surveillance regime violated human rights law, finds ECHR

#33

Post by ben_w »

pjc50 wrote: post #18
clubm8 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have a suspicion that at least part of the drive for Brexit comes from the determination of the British security services to preserve their last little island of unaccountable Empire That's a poor strategy then, since it's likely Scotland will have a second independence referendum and there is much strong support for independence now that it's seen as a way to stay in the European union.

Sadly there's no constitutional obligation for them to hold or respect that, or even preserve the Scottish parliament; I fear the situation may end up like Catalonia. Similar signals are in place for Northern Ireland.

Well you are technically correct, and despite the meme being that technically correct is the best type of correct, I don’t think that argument will hold up very well against a crowd of angry Glaswegians.

Re: UK’s mass surveillance regime violated human rights law, finds ECHR

#34

Post by [deleted] »

pjc50 wrote: post #2

I have a suspicion that at least part of the drive for Brexit comes from the determination of the British security services to preserve their last little island of unaccountable Empire. There have been conflicts with ECHR over torture, "extraordinary rendition", the treatment of Republicans in Northern Ireland, and (repeatedly) over mass surveillance. One former "M", Richard Dearlove, is an overt Brexit campaigner. (…

[deleted]

Re: UK’s mass surveillance regime violated human rights law, finds ECHR

#35

Post by fvdessen »

monkeynotes wrote: post #10
vidarh wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fact, as far as I know the only European states that are not part of ECHR and Council of Europe are the Vatican (since they're a theocracy...), Kosovo since it has limited international recognition, Kazakhstan and Belarus over human rights violations. No European state that'd be eligible has chosen to voluntarily stay outside. Azerbaijan and Russia are the closest to being in trouble of the current members (Russia…

It's surprising to find that the ECHR does not consider same-sex marriage a human right.

The ECHR was founded in 1953, at that time homosexuality was illegal pretty much everywhere. And if you look at UDHR (from 1948), There is article 16 that is kind of against same-sex marriage. But it's not very clearly stated; I don't think they even imagined that same-sex marriage could one day be a thing.

Re: UK’s mass surveillance regime violated human rights law, finds ECHR

#36

Post by calcifer »

vuln wrote: post #23
rezeroed wrote: post #22

Anjem Choudary is currently in the news. With the likes of him and his supporters I'm not sure I expect much else. I'd prefer it wasn't done, but even with that we still have bombs and vehicle rampages. What are the alternatives?

Just be more vigilant. Sadiq Khan has said he believes the threat of terror attacks are “part and parcel of living in a big city” and encouraged Londoners to be vigilant to combat dangers.

That is not what he said, but certain right wing groups enjoy peddling this lie so much that the London subreddit has an automoderator config that corrects people [1] whenever it surfaces.

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/london/comments/8e3vlz/the_heatwave...

Re: UK’s mass surveillance regime violated human rights law, finds ECHR

#37

Post by fvdessen »

daveFNbuck wrote: post #28
jaredmosley wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see anything about sexual orientation, just sex which would be about being male/female (possibly transexual depending on the interpretation?). [Edit] There is this, which seems to leave it to the nations: >>Article 12 – Right to marry >> Men and women of marriageable age have the right to marry and to found a family, according to the national laws governing the exercise of this right.

Discriminating against sexual orientation isn't possible without discriminating against sex. A woman is allowed to marry a man, but a man is not.

Both man and women have the right to enter marriage, which is defined in the document as the union between Man and Women (Much clearer in the french version).

Re: UK’s mass surveillance regime violated human rights law, finds ECHR

#38

Post by [deleted] »

pjc50 wrote: post #2

I have a suspicion that at least part of the drive for Brexit comes from the determination of the British security services to preserve their last little island of unaccountable Empire. There have been conflicts with ECHR over torture, "extraordinary rendition", the treatment of Republicans in Northern Ireland, and (repeatedly) over mass surveillance. One former "M", Richard Dearlove, is an overt Brexit campaigner. (…

[deleted]

Re: UK’s mass surveillance regime violated human rights law, finds ECHR

#39

Post by gadders »

nicktelford wrote: post #3
pjc50 wrote: post #2

I have a suspicion that at least part of the drive for Brexit comes from the determination of the British security services to preserve their last little island of unaccountable Empire. There have been conflicts with ECHR over torture, "extraordinary rendition", the treatment of Republicans in Northern Ireland, and (repeatedly) over mass surveillance. One former "M", Richard Dearlove, is an overt Brexit campaigner. (…

ECHR is not a part of the European Union, so Brexit won't take us out of it. However, I believe that the EU requires members be signatories of the ECHR, so Brexit would make leaving it much easier. It's well documented that Theresa May wants to leave the ECHR; somewhat alarming since both Russia and Azerbaijan, countries with comparatively poor records on human rights, are signatories.

>>somewhat alarming since both Russia and Azerbaijan, countries with comparatively poor records on human rights, are signatories.

So you admit it's ineffective then?

Re: UK’s mass surveillance regime violated human rights law, finds ECHR

#40

Post by billpg »

nbevans wrote: post #12
pjc50 wrote: post #2

I have a suspicion that at least part of the drive for Brexit comes from the determination of the British security services to preserve their last little island of unaccountable Empire. There have been conflicts with ECHR over torture, "extraordinary rendition", the treatment of Republicans in Northern Ireland, and (repeatedly) over mass surveillance. One former "M", Richard Dearlove, is an overt Brexit campaigner. (…

ECHR has nothing to do with the EU. And Britain created the ECHR.

They both have "European" in the name, so obviously the same thing. Now if you'll excuse me I'm reading my Daily Mail.
Post reply on HN