presentation at law society human rights conference 10 october 2015
DESCRIPTION
These are the slides from a presentation by me at the Law Society Annual Human Rights Conference 2015. More details: http://www.tjmcintyre.com/2015/10/law-society-annual-human-rights.htmlTRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Presentation at Law Society Human Rights Conference 10 October 2015](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022051622/563db892550346aa9a94edae/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Privacy online: current developmentsDr TJ McIntyre, Digital Rights Ireland andUCD Sutherland School of Law
![Page 2: Presentation at Law Society Human Rights Conference 10 October 2015](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022051622/563db892550346aa9a94edae/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Ireland has given rise to some important European cases
![Page 3: Presentation at Law Society Human Rights Conference 10 October 2015](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022051622/563db892550346aa9a94edae/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Data Retention ChallengeDigital Rights Ireland v. Minister for Communication and ors.
(c) David Rooney
![Page 4: Presentation at Law Society Human Rights Conference 10 October 2015](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022051622/563db892550346aa9a94edae/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Data Retention ChallengeDigital Rights Ireland v. Minister for Communication and ors.
(c) David Rooney
![Page 5: Presentation at Law Society Human Rights Conference 10 October 2015](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022051622/563db892550346aa9a94edae/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
![Page 7: Presentation at Law Society Human Rights Conference 10 October 2015](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022051622/563db892550346aa9a94edae/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
![Page 8: Presentation at Law Society Human Rights Conference 10 October 2015](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022051622/563db892550346aa9a94edae/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Safe HarborChallengeSchrems v. Data Protection Commissioner
CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 Network Cultures
![Page 9: Presentation at Law Society Human Rights Conference 10 October 2015](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022051622/563db892550346aa9a94edae/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
![Page 10: Presentation at Law Society Human Rights Conference 10 October 2015](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022051622/563db892550346aa9a94edae/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
![Page 11: Presentation at Law Society Human Rights Conference 10 October 2015](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022051622/563db892550346aa9a94edae/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
With some interesting domestic law along the way
• Digital Rights Ireland Ltd v. Minister for Communication & ors[2010] IEHC 221
• Permitting the action to proceed as an actio popularis
• Refusing security for costs
• Schrems v. Data Protection Commissioner (unreported, 16 July 2014)
• Granting Ireland’s first protective costs order limiting exposure to €10,000
• Amici curiae appointed in both cases
![Page 12: Presentation at Law Society Human Rights Conference 10 October 2015](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022051622/563db892550346aa9a94edae/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
And wide international impact
![Page 13: Presentation at Law Society Human Rights Conference 10 October 2015](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022051622/563db892550346aa9a94edae/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
But what other lessons can we draw from these cases?
![Page 14: Presentation at Law Society Human Rights Conference 10 October 2015](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022051622/563db892550346aa9a94edae/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Some aspects are parochial
![Page 15: Presentation at Law Society Human Rights Conference 10 October 2015](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022051622/563db892550346aa9a94edae/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Privacy is vital for Irish techindustryIreland has become a battleground for access to user data
![Page 16: Presentation at Law Society Human Rights Conference 10 October 2015](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022051622/563db892550346aa9a94edae/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
But will Irish surveillance law stand up to scrutiny?• No judicial approval
for access to internet communications
• No stored communications law
• Misc. bodies have power to demand communications records without external approval
• Inadequate judicial oversight
![Page 17: Presentation at Law Society Human Rights Conference 10 October 2015](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022051622/563db892550346aa9a94edae/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Compare the Report of the Designated Judge (March 2014)…
![Page 18: Presentation at Law Society Human Rights Conference 10 October 2015](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022051622/563db892550346aa9a94edae/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
… with the Data Protection Commissioner audit of AGS (March 2014)
• “The Team referred to an audit it conducted of a technology company and how it had viewed a request from AGS to that company which cited the 2011 Communications (Retention of Data) Act as the legal basis to seek the data. The Team explained to AGS that the ODPC had advised the company that it was not covered under the 2011 Act.”
• “The situation where a request is made without the Chief Superintendent’s knowledge and signed/authorised retrospectively by the Chief Superintendent did notfollowthe requirements specified in the 2011 Act. The Team advised AGS that all requests for call and internet traffic data should be authorised by the Chief Superintendent on a case by case basis rather than on an aggregate basis at the end of a particular time period.”
![Page 19: Presentation at Law Society Human Rights Conference 10 October 2015](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022051622/563db892550346aa9a94edae/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Some aspects are Europe-wideWe now have two European human rights jurisdictions: What is the relationship between them?
![Page 22: Presentation at Law Society Human Rights Conference 10 October 2015](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022051622/563db892550346aa9a94edae/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Article 52(3) Charter of Fundamental Rights
• “In so far as this Charter contains rights which correspond to rights guaranteed by the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the meaning and scope of those rights shall be the same as those laid down by the said Convention. This provision shall not prevent Union law providing more extensive protection.”
![Page 23: Presentation at Law Society Human Rights Conference 10 October 2015](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022051622/563db892550346aa9a94edae/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Review of surveillance measuresECtHR v. CJEU
1. Privacy the main right
• Art. 8 ECHR
• But also Art. 10
2. Political authorisation of surveillance is acceptable
• Kennedy v. UK
3. “Strategic monitoring” acceptable subject to “adequate safeguards against abuse”
• Weber & Saravia v. Germany
4. Applies margin of appreciation
5. Can review national security measures
6. A court of moral victories?
1. Data protection als0 a fundamental right
• Art. 8 CFR
2. Access to metadata must be approved by a judge or equivalent
• Digital Rights Ireland
3. Access “on a generalised basis” to content “compromises the essence” of the right to privacy
• Schrems
4. ?
5. ?
6. A court with teeth: supremacy and direct effect of EU law, guarantee of adequate and effective remedies, etc.
![Page 24: Presentation at Law Society Human Rights Conference 10 October 2015](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022051622/563db892550346aa9a94edae/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Will surveillance by EU states be held to the same norms?
![Page 25: Presentation at Law Society Human Rights Conference 10 October 2015](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022051622/563db892550346aa9a94edae/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
US critics accuse the EU of hypocrisy
• “The US official refused to address claims that there had been hypocrisy in Europe. But he stressed that the EU ruling would not address the concerns of European citizens worried about the surveillance by their own governments, since the ruling only covered transfers of data across the Atlantic.”
• “A US tech executive said the decision would be “highly disruptive” to the industry in the US and Europe. ‘A lot of these issues of America using surveillance also apply in Europe,’ said the executive. ‘So it’s ridiculous to see this as a one-way street.’”
“US tech companies overhaul operations after EU data ruling”, Financial Times 6 Oct. 2015
![Page 26: Presentation at Law Society Human Rights Conference 10 October 2015](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022051622/563db892550346aa9a94edae/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Winston Maxwell, Hogan Lovells Chronicle of Data Protection, 6 Aug. 2015
![Page 27: Presentation at Law Society Human Rights Conference 10 October 2015](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022051622/563db892550346aa9a94edae/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Some aspects are worldwideDigital Rights Ireland and Schrems contribute to pressures for internet fragmentation
Data localisation, blocking, geo-located censorship more common
(c) Kaspersky, Kaspersky Security Bulletin, 2013
![Page 28: Presentation at Law Society Human Rights Conference 10 October 2015](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022051622/563db892550346aa9a94edae/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Some aspects are structuralOutsourcing surveillance reduces costs & encourages disproportionate use
Giant private databases are a rich target for states and hackers alike
Law is only a partial remedy
Time for a move towards a decentralised internet?
![Page 29: Presentation at Law Society Human Rights Conference 10 October 2015](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022051622/563db892550346aa9a94edae/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Thank youQuestions or comments?DigitalRights.ie | TJMcIntyre.com | @TJMcIntyre