Mass Surveillance, Counterterrorism and Privacy: The Way Forward
|
|
- Jonas Montgomery
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Transcript Mass Surveillance, Counterterrorism and Privacy: The Way Forward Ben Emmerson QC UN Special Rapporteur on Counterterrorism and Human Rights Rt Hon Sir Malcolm Rifkind MP Chairman, Intelligence and Security Committee Chair: Dr Patricia M Lewis Research Director, International Security, Chatham House 28 October 2014 The views expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the speaker(s) and participants do not necessarily reflect the view of Chatham House, its staff, associates or Council. Chatham House is independent and owes no allegiance to any government or to any political body. It does not take institutional positions on policy issues. This document is issued on the understanding that if any extract is used, the author(s)/ speaker(s) and Chatham House should be credited, preferably with the date of the publication or details of the event. Where this document refers to or reports statements made by speakers at an event every effort has been made to provide a fair representation of their views and opinions. The published text of speeches and presentations may differ from delivery. 10 St James s Square, London SW1Y 4LE T +44 (0) F +44 (0) Patron: Her Majesty The Queen Chairman: Stuart Popham QC Director: Dr Robin Niblett Charity Registration Number:
2 2 Mass Surveillance, Counterterrorism and Privacy: The Way Forward Patricia Lewis Hello, everybody. Welcome to Chatham House. My name is Patricia Lewis. I m the research director here for International Security. We re here tonight to look at the issue of mass surveillance, counterterrorism and privacy and thinking very much about how we move on from where we were after the Snowden revelations. We re very fortunate to have with us today Ben Emmerson QC, who is the UN special rapporteur on counterterrorism and human rights and Sir Malcolm Rifkind, who is the chairman of the Intelligence and Security Committee in parliament. Before I get on to the substance of this meeting, I d like to remind you of a few things. First of all, this event is being held on the record. We do encourage you to tweet, however if you are using your mobile phones and even if you re not, can you right now make sure they re turned to silent? I can assure you that they will ring at the most inopportune moment, particularly if you ask to speak in a Q&A session. They seem to know that you re about to do that. First of all, Ben is going to speak for about 10 minutes about the rapport that he made to the United Nations last week I think it was and then Malcolm will speak for about 10 minutes and let us know about the work in his committee and his response to what s going on in the UN. Malcolm has to leave, unfortunately, at 13:45 in order to be able to vote in parliament, so we will unfortunately lose him. What I ll do in the questions is I ll ask people who have questions specifically to Malcolm to address them to him early on in the proceedings. It s my great pleasure first of all to introduce to you Ben Emmerson QC, who is currently the British judge on the Residual Mechanism of the International Criminal Tribune of Rwanda and the International Criminal Tribune for the Former Yugoslavia. He s previously acted as special adviser to the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court and special adviser to the international judges of the UN backed Khmer Rouge Tribunal in Cambodia. In 2011 he was elected by the Human Rights Council as the UN special rapporteur on counterterrorism and human rights. In this capacity he reports annually to the UN General Assembly, the Human Rights Council and relevant entities established by the UN Security Council. He conducts country visits and reports and provides technical and other advice to states. Last week he made his report to the UN on the issue of surveillance privacy and counterterrorism. At least, that was part of it. Ben, perhaps you could tell us a few things about the report, how you made it, what took you there and what the conclusions were. Ben Emmerson Sure. First of all, just a few introductory points, particularly bearing in mind that we may be at Chatham House, but we re not under Chatham House Rules. The approach that I take to this issue and in which the report takes is not necessarily an international approach. It s not focused on the United Kingdom s domestic legislation or the United States, although of course, as a result of the Snowden revelations, more is known publicly about the covert surveillance programmes run by the US in the UK than those that are known to be run by, for example, China, a state with very significant internet penetration,
3 3 Mass Surveillance, Counterterrorism and Privacy: The Way Forward Russia, France, Israel and other partners of the United States and the United Kingdom. Although... Malcolm, of course, knows much more about the detail of the operation of those programmes than the rest of us do, we are to some extent looking at these issues through the prison if you ll forget the pun - of the disclosures by Edward Snowden. The second point I wanted to make by way of introduction is that I look at this because of my mandate solely from the point of view of international human rights law and the compatibility of current mass surveillance programmes with, in particular, the right to privacy under article 17 of the International Covenant, roughly equivalent to article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. What I ve tried to do in the report is to subject mass surveillance programmes in their general operation to the process of analysis that is mandated under international human rights instruments, which of course, involves going through various steps to determine whether a particular measure is proportionate to a legitimate and important public interest. The debate that followed Snowden was I think a great deal more lively in the United States than in the United Kingdom. Many of those who were involved in promoting debate in the United Kingdom were disappointed that the public took rather less interest in it than they had expected. Certainly, at the international level, what we had seen is that there was a very different reaction depending on the state that the person concerned comes from. Those who have come and emerged from totalitarian rule, for example, or have parts of their state, like Germany, that have emerged from totalitarian rule, are acutely sensitive to the privacy implications of surveillance on the internet, in a way that those who have lived under liberal democracies are sometimes less so. Overall, the issue has been propelled high on the United Nation s agenda, both on the Human Rights Council level and significantly the level of the General Assembly. In December of last year the General Assembly adopted resolution 68/167, which was cosponsored by 67 member states and adopted without a vote. It s a resolution which affirms and this is an important affirmation that the right of privacy exists online and must be protected online and calls on all states to review their procedures, practices and legislation in relation to communication surveillance, interception and the collection of personal data, emphasizing the need to ensure full implementation of their obligations under article 17. The resolution also mandated the high commissioner of human rights to produce reports both to the Human Rights Council and to the General Assembly and that report was initially produced on 30 June. The work that I m doing is therefore not in isolation. It s part of a much broader framework of interest within the UN. There has been recently, a couple of months ago a substantial panel discussion at the Human Rights Council, which is a significant process under which states have an opportunity to debate and contribute to the discussion. There was an interactive dialogue between states during the presentation of my report last week.
4 4 Mass Surveillance, Counterterrorism and Privacy: The Way Forward Interestingly, it s the first and only time that the United States has not participated in an interactive dialogue, following a report that I ve presented. Normally, even where the reports are critical of the US s position, they will take part in the debate, indicate which parts they accept and which they reject and generally contribute constructively. It was a surprise frankly that the US chose to remain silent and I ve thought about it quite a lot since as to why that might have been. The UK, its closest ally, joined the discussion and did so in an extremely constructive way, effectively endorsing the principles that are set out in the report and affirming the United Kingdom s commitment to those principles. I ve kind of come to the conclusion that the US must have taken a deliberate policy decision not to engage. If you want to make sure that the debate is at a minimal level, the best way is not to say anything, because anything that the administration says in that forum is likely to promote yet greater discussion and debate on what is the topic of real contention and interest in the US. Bringing it right to date, the Brazilian and German missions to the UN are now cosponsoring a further resolution, which is based on this report and the high commissioner s report and will call for the creation of a new special procedure mandate. What I do, as special rapporteur on counterterrorism and human rights, is one of the special procedures mandates and there is currently none which directly focuses on the right to privacy and in particular digital privacy. It falls to some extent within my mandate in so far as the justification for access or mass surveillance and, depending on your point of view, the paradigm justification is often said to be counterterrorism. It falls to some extent within the mandate of the special rapporteur on freedom of expression in the sense that the right to freedom of expression carries with it a corresponding obligation of privacy and there are implications for other human rights, as well, but there is no special procedures mandate which focuses specifically on what is a very complicated and important and challenging topic. The basic conclusion of my report is not very earth-shattering and I m not sure it would come as a surprise to anybody who had looked at these issues. The basic conclusion of the report is that the current technology available for mass surveillance of the internet poses a direct challenge to an established norm of international law. We have an understanding currently of the right to privacy under article 17, which cannot comfortably accommodate mass surveillance programmes. Something is going to have to give in the equation. There may well be justifications on a counterterrorism basis. There s no doubt that the pursuit of effective counterterrorism strategies is not only legitimate, it s an obligation that rests on states and to my mind it s a human rights obligation that rests on states. I ve always made it clear during the course of my mandate that the rights of victims of terrorism and the duty of states to protect them are right at the heart of any debate on the legitimacy and proportionality of counterterrorism techniques, but one is driven to the conclusion here that our current understanding of our right to privacy doesn t sufficiently accommodate the operations that are currently taking place. It comes really to this: the conceptual framework for analysing the right to privacy requires that you start by identifying the legitimate aim for interfering with people s
5 5 Mass Surveillance, Counterterrorism and Privacy: The Way Forward privacy rights. No doubt at all that counterterrorism is not just a legitimate aim, but it s really at the apex in terms of public importance. To that extent, we know that we are in the territory of a balancing exercise that needs to take place, proportionality [indiscernible]. That balancing exercise, under established principles governing the right to privacy, must take place on an individualized basis. In other words on a case by case basis a judgment must be made, whether the interference with an individual s privacy is proportionate to the aim which it pursues, so in our paradigm, whether it s proportionate to the countering of terrorism. It must be the least intrusive method available to achieve that objective and it must carry with it safeguards, which include in the context of intrusive surveillance, legislation that prescribes limits on the categories of persons whose communication can be surveyed, limits on the duration of the surveillance and appropriate methods for independent review. When one looks Malcolm will correct me on this because I think we look at the technology from a slightly different perspective when one has an operation, the capacity to place taps on fibre optic cables through which the majority of communication traffic runs in order to establish or determine what communication data there is, to subject, retain data, to automating data mining algorithms which link individuals, the IP addresses, the location information, what is called communication data, through which very detailed and accurate profiles on people s lives can be built up, the fact of the matter is that we have done away with the core of the right of privacy as it arises on the internet. Again, I come back to the proposition that there is now international consensus at UN level that the right to privacy applies on the internet. There are those who have argued that if you use the internet, it s rather like sending a postcard. If you send an , encrypted or un-crypted, you may as well assume that your communications can be read. That view has been decisively and authoritatively rejected by the General Assembly in an unanimous resolution. When one looks at the capacities that exist effectively unlimited amount of communications data, which of course includes a vast amount of data for people who are of no interest to the authorities whatsoever. The proportionality balance has to move, so instead of looking at the proportionality of an individual interference, you need to look at the proportionality of a programme as a whole and that s a very different kind of proportionality analysis. What it requires and I don t for a minute dispute that there may be a legitimate argument that counterterrorism objectives could justify the complete abrogation of the right to privacy on the internet, but that s a big debate. It s a huge debate to have. Are we prepared as a society to do away altogether with the right to privacy of communications, which are now the only way globally the only way by which people exchange information and ideas? The basic thrust of the report is this: if we are to do that, as societies, as governments, as parliaments, we need to be absolutely transparent about what we are doing and when I say transparent, assume that there are limits on the operational and technical data that can be put into the public domain, but we do need to be much more transparent with the public about the justification that is being advised.
6 6 Mass Surveillance, Counterterrorism and Privacy: The Way Forward With great respect to those who gave evidence to the ISC, from services, their evidence was of an extraordinarily generic kind and I think those associated with the services do privately acknowledge that there is an obligation now to put much, much more detail into the public domain, to make the case and if the case is to be made, then again, under article 17 there is an obligation to have detailed laws which precisely justify the techniques that are being used. Last word: the great advantage of a parliamentary process of enacting specific legislation, which make specific provision and explains to the public exactly what is being done in their name is not only that it satisfies the lawfulness requirement, the requirement of the international law, that this type of thing needs to be regulated by law, but just as importantly, on what is after all a very important issue, it enables the Governments of the day to persuade the public that there is a justification for what they are doing. In the end, in order to justify these programmes as proportionate on that macro level, because there is after all no individual specific proportionality analysis to be conducted, where you re drag netting vast amounts of data from an unidentified number of people, the only way to really justify this proportionate is if states are in a position to persuade their electorates that the total abrogation of the right to privacy is justified on counterterrorism grounds, so as to make it proportionate to have the capacity to survey, read, monitor the communications of a potentially infinite number of innocent people anywhere in the world. Patricia Lewis Thank you, Ben. Sir Malcolm is member of parliament for Kensington and Chelsea, chairman of the British Intelligence and Security Committee. Sir Malcolm has been an elected member of parliament since 1974, defence secretary from , foreign secretary from , he is one of only four ministers who have served through the whole prime ministerships of both Margaret Thatcher and John Major and he is currently on the top level group of UK Parliamentarians for Nuclear Disarmament and Arm Proliferation and is a member of the European Leadership Network executive board. Malcolm, it s great to have you back. Transparency, oversight, proportionality, right to privacy, it s all your normal daily. Sir Malcolm Rifkind Thank you very much. Can I begin by just making two general points? First of all, I actually agree with a great deal of what Ben has said both in his report and what he has said this evening. Secondly, the Intelligence and Security Committee, which I chair is currently carrying out an inquiry into privacy and security, the very issues that we are discussing this evening. As we have not yet come to any conclusions, you will hear my personal views. They are not the views of the committee, because the committee has not yet come to that stage. I think in order to make this as interesting as possible, let me concentrate on what I disagree with the report and what has been said this evening. First of all, the case starts from the use of the phrase mass surveillance. It s quite important to know what we re talking about when that phrase is used. It has slightly Orwellian tones to it. It implies that
7 7 Mass Surveillance, Counterterrorism and Privacy: The Way Forward every single person in this room is likely to be having their s and their telephone communications listened to by someone in DSHQ or in one of the other intelligence agencies. I m not saying that s what s alleged, but that s the implication of the term mass surveillance. There s a very great difference between democratic societies, such as Britain, most of Western Europe, United States and authoritarian countries, like Russia and China. Their surveillance systems are used to try and identify political opposition, to try and identify those who might wish to change the government and they are quite open about that. Not that they admit it, but they certainly take much effort to conceal it and the very way in which the Chinese take effort to control the internet to prevent access by their population just has no parallel in Western society. Let s be quite clear: our intelligence agencies I don t think I m saying anything controversial have not the remotest interest in the s or the telephone communications or the political opinions of the vast majority of the British public or indeed elsewhere in the world. They have no interest in it. They don t have the resources to involve themselves in mass surveillance if it implied the whole population, nor do they have the time to do it, nor would they be keeping the law if they tried to do it. They would be breaking the law and would be subject to criminal sanction. What we re actually talking about is certainly a capability that has developed in recent years, to have access to quite large numbers of s or voice communications if that s what you want to do and if you get a lawful authority to do it for a specific purpose. The purpose is primarily counterterrorism at this point in time, but it also includes serious crime or paedophilia or other matters of very serious public interest. What Ben in his report says and what many of the critics say is we have no objection to targeted intrusion if there s a particular individual who s believed to be a possible terrorist or an actual terrorist and you want to look at his s, even then you have a lawful authority. You have to get a warrant from the secretary of state to read anyone s in the UK, British citizen or non-british citizen if they re in this island. That s fine. That s not too controversial. What happens? How do the intelligence agencies and the security forces go about preventing terrorism or capturing terrorists if they are limited to only looking at those that they already know or suspect to be serious terrorists? The reality is there are a substantial number of people in this country or in other countries who mean harm to others, who either aren t known to the intelligence agencies or don t become known until they ve already committed a terrorist act? What we re talking about is not targeted intrusion or mass surveillance. What we re actually talking about is two kinds of targeted intrusion. The simple kind, when you already know who you re looking for and you get authority to look at the person s or listen to their voice communications, but equally irrelevant and it s a form of targeting is how do you identify from a much larger group of people who might be the bad guys who are meaning to carry out let us say terrorist acts. When it is said that the intelligence agencies in Western countries have a capability to look at very large numbers of s, that s true, but what do we mean by look at?
8 8 Mass Surveillance, Counterterrorism and Privacy: The Way Forward I think it s important to point out that what actually happens when you have what is called bulk interception is that incredibly sophisticated computers are processed to look for certain selectors and that selector might be an address or it might be a reference to jihadi terrorism or it might be some other phrase or sentence or word that has connotations of being a bad guy. The computers, without any single person being involved, reject the per cent of the limited number they are looking at. They reject them all, they are never seen again. No human eye has ever looked at the content, has read the s of those concerned. It picks out what is usually a tiny fraction where these selectors that I mentioned do give a prima facie indication that something bad might be happening, that this might be an from a terrorist in Yemen to a radicalized youngster in Birmingham who wants ideas or organizational plans or whatever. When the agencies get the indication of the tiny number that the computer, not a person, has identified through these selectors, then if GCHQ or MI6 or MI5 want to read the content of that or listen to the conversation, they then have to get a warrant from the secretary of state. A warrant from the secretary of state doesn t mean just picking out the phone and saying, Can I please have permission? Yes, by all means go ahead. We ve inspected these warrants. We ve seen many examples of them. They re five or six pages long. They re full of questions like exactly the points that Ben has raised, proportionality, is the intrusion of this person s privacy justified by what you think you might obtain, why are you interested in this in the first place, what is it about what you ve already learned that makes you suspicious? One of the things I personally believe is that we should be publishing examples of what these warrants look like, because they d give a lot of reassurance to the public, as they have to me personally. This isn t some... well, indeed, when I was foreign secretary I actually had to approve some of these warrants. That was part of my job as foreign secretary. The home secretary does the same for MI5 and a lot of effort goes into each individual one, so I think we ought to ask ourselves that when you hear references to bulk interception or mass surveillance, it does not imply an indiscriminate access to respectable people s s or telephone communications. By access we mean not that the computer s programmed to look for selectors, but that they re actually being read. Ben quite rightly emphasized whatever you do, it has to have a legal basis and it s always remembering that our intelligence agencies are subject and they subject themselves not just to compliance with the intelligence services act and with [indiscernible], which is the main legislation, but also what people perhaps are less aware, the Human Rights Act. I know for a fact that our intelligence agencies are stuffed with lawyers nowadays. 30 years ago they didn t have any. Now you hardly can run around the building without bumping into one. What these lawyers are looking for is not just are they observing the legal requirements as laid down in the main acts of parliament, but whether they are complying with the European Convention on Human Rights or our Human Rights Act.
9 9 Mass Surveillance, Counterterrorism and Privacy: The Way Forward These are judgments that have to be made. I m not saying they always get it right, of course. That s what courts are for. Occasionally, the courts might disagree if they ever came before the court, but I am absolutely convinced that our intelligence agencies and the people who run them strive to operate under the law. There is additional question: is that law itself satisfactory? Does it need to be modernized? Has it kept up with technological change? That s what the committee I chair is looking at and other people are looking at and there s a separate question whether we should have more transparency, so that many things can be shared with the public, but of course you can t share them with the British public without sharing with the rest of the world, including the bad guys. So you actually have to be able to identify and there is a lot of examples of things that could be made public without any risk to national security, but don t expect that to be other than a modest proportion of what our intelligence agencies do, because at the end of the day they are secret intelligence agencies and you cannot reveal secrets to the British public without revealing them to the rest of the world. So we have a healthy debate. We re a lucky country. Ben mentioned how British public opinion is slightly more supportive of the intelligence agencies. It s because of Bletchley Park. It s not just James Bond. It s because the single greatest intelligence triumph of any country was Bletchley Park in the Second World War, when we got the German Naval Codes. Remember, this is very relevant to Snowden, what was crucial about Bletchley Park was not just that through the enigma, they broke these Naval Codes and knew what the German Navy in Berlin, the messages that were being sent to [indiscernible] in the Atlantic. It s not only that they broke these codes. It s that for three years the Germans didn t know they d broken the codes. If they had known them, of course they would ve changed the system over night and that s a sort of damaged Snowden. Many of his allegations are rubbish. Some of the things he said may be true, but don t assume because they re true, it was right to make some of them public and that is, I think, the dilemma we re all dealing with. Thank you.
Privacy And? Surveillance
University of Leeds From the SelectedWorks of Subhajit Basu Fall November 28, 2015 Privacy And? Surveillance Subhajit Basu Available at: https://works.bepress.com/subhajitbasu/88/ School of something FACULTY
More informationThe Role of Local Government in Addressing the Impact of Syrian Refugees: Jordan Case Study
Middle East and North Africa Programme Workshop Summary The Role of Local Government in Addressing the Impact of Syrian Refugees: Jordan Case Study Amman, Jordan 2 3 June 2015 In partnership with the Identity
More informationEthiopia s Foreign Policy: Regional Integration and International Priorities
Africa Programme Meeting Summary Ethiopia s Foreign Policy: Regional Integration and International Priorities Summary of and Answer Session Minister of Foreign Affairs, Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia
More informationGoverning the DRC: Balancing Local, Provincial and National Concerns
Africa Programme Meeting Summary Governing the DRC: Balancing Local, Provincial and National Concerns Prime Minister of the Democratic Republic of the Congo Dr Alex Vines OBE Research Director, Area Studies
More informationInvestigatory Powers Bill
Investigatory Powers Bill How to make it fit-for-purpose A briefing for the House of Lords by the Don t Spy on Us coalition Contents Introduction 1 About Don t Spy on Us 1 The Bill fails to introduce independent
More informationGhana s 2016 Election: Processes and Priorities of the Electoral Commission
Africa Programme Transcript Ghana s 2016 Election: Processes and Priorities of the Electoral Commission Charlotte Osei Chairperson, Electoral Commission of Ghana 4 November 2016 The views expressed in
More informationHuman Rights and Ethical Implications of Approaches to Countering Violent Extremism in Europe January 2018
Meeting Summary Human Rights and Ethical Implications of Approaches to Countering Violent Extremism in Europe 11 12 January 2018 The views expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the
More informationAPPENDIX. 1. The Equipment Interference Regime which is relevant to the activities of GCHQ principally derives from the following statutes:
APPENDIX THE EQUIPMENT INTERFERENCE REGIME 1. The Equipment Interference Regime which is relevant to the activities of GCHQ principally derives from the following statutes: (a) (b) (c) (d) the Intelligence
More informationINVESTIGATION OF ELECTRONIC DATA PROTECTED BY ENCRYPTION ETC DRAFT CODE OF PRACTICE
INVESTIGATION OF ELECTRONIC DATA PROTECTED BY ENCRYPTION ETC CODE OF PRACTICE Preliminary draft code: This document is circulated by the Home Office in advance of enactment of the RIP Bill as an indication
More informationRegulation of Investigatory Powers Bill
Regulation of Investigatory Powers Bill EXPLANATORY NOTES Explanatory Notes to the Bill, prepared by the Home Office, will be published separately as Bill. EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS Mr Secretary
More informationIN THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS Application no /15. -v- UNITED KINGDOM SUBMISSIONS MADE IN LIGHT OF THE THIRD IPT JUDGMENT OF 22 JUNE 2015
IN THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS Application no. 24960/15 B E T W E E N:- 10 HUMAN RIGHTS ORGANISATIONS -v- UNITED KINGDOM Applicants Respondent Government Introduction SUBMISSIONS MADE IN LIGHT OF
More informationChina's Perspectives on the South China Sea Verdict
Transcript China's Perspectives on the South China Sea Verdict HE Ambassador Liu Xiaoming Ambassador of the People's Republic of China to the United Kingdom 25 July 2016 The views expressed in this document
More informationINVESTIGATORY POWERS BILL EXPLANATORY NOTES
INVESTIGATORY POWERS BILL EXPLANATORY NOTES What these notes do These Explanatory Notes relate to the Investigatory Powers Bill as brought from the House of Commons on 8. These Explanatory Notes have been
More informationLaw Commission Review of the Search and Surveillance Act 2012
Law Commission Review of the Search and Surveillance Act 2012 Contact Person: John Hancock Senior Legal Adviser New Zealand Human Rights Commission johnh@hrc.co.nz 1 Law Commission Review of the Search
More informationLetter from Rt Hon Theresa May MP, Home Secretary, to the Chair of the Committee, 26 April Communication Data
Letter from Rt Hon Theresa May MP, Home Secretary, to the Chair of the Committee, 26 April 2012 Communication Data Thank you for your letter of 2 April regarding Home Office plans on electronic surveillance.
More informationPlea for referral to police for investigation of alleged s.1 RIPA violations by GCHQ
16th March 2014 The Rt. Hon Dominic Grieve QC MP, Attorney General, 20 Victoria Street London SW1H 0NF c.c. The Rt. Hon Theresa May, Home Secretary Dear Mr. Grieve, Plea for referral to police for investigation
More information1 June Introduction
Privacy International's submission in advance of the consideration of the periodic report of the United Kingdom, Human Rights Committee, 114 th Session, 29 June 24 July 2015 1. Introduction 1 June 2015
More informationRegulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000
ch2300a00a 01-08-00 22:01:07 ACTA Unit: paga RA Proof 20.7.2000 Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 CHAPTER 23 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS Part I Communications Chapter I Interception Unlawful and
More informationMexico s Foreign Policy: Leveraging the Domestic Transformation
Transcript Mexico s Foreign Policy: Leveraging the Domestic Transformation José Antonio Meade Kuribreña Secretary of Foreign Affairs, Mexico Chair: Dr Robin Niblett Director, Chatham House 13 June 2014
More informationI. REGULATION OF INVESTIGATORY POWERS BILL
These notes refer to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Bill as introduced in the House of Commons on 9th February 2000 [Bill 64] I. REGULATION OF INVESTIGATORY POWERS BILL II. EXPLANATORY NOTES INTRODUCTION
More informationThe Evolution of Australian Foreign Policy
Transcript The Evolution of Australian Foreign Policy Julie Bishop Minister for Foreign Affairs, Australian Government Chair: Lord Michael Williams of Baglan Distinguished Visiting Fellow and Acting Head,
More informationOn 4 November the government published the draft Investigatory Powers Bill, set to be. Understanding the Investigatory Powers Bill.
Royal United Services Institute for Defence and Security Studies Briefing Paper, November 2015 Understanding the Investigatory Powers Bill Calum Jeffray Key Points Many of the most significant proposed
More informationHAUT-COMMISSARIAT AUX DROITS DE L HOMME OFFICE OF THE HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS PALAIS DES NATIONS 1211 GENEVA 10, SWITZERLAND
HAUT-COMMISSARIAT AUX DROITS DE L HOMME OFFICE OF THE HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS PALAIS DES NATIONS 1211 GENEVA 10, SWITZERLAND Mandates of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection
More informationSubmission to the Joint Committee on the draft Investigatory Powers Bill
21 December 2015 Submission to the Joint Committee on the draft Investigatory Powers Bill 1. The UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression;
More informationInvestigatory Powers Bill. How to make it fit-for-purpose
Investigatory Powers Bill How to make it fit-for-purpose Contents Introduction 1 The draft Bill fails in its mission to be clear and comprehensive 2 The operational case has not been made for all powers
More informationCovert Human Intelligence Sources Code of Practice
Covert Human Intelligence Sources Code of Practice Presented to Parliament pursuant to section 71(4) of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. 2 Covert Human Intelligence Sources Code of Practice
More informationANDREW MARR SHOW APRIL 9 TH 2017 PRITI PATEL
1 ANDREW MARR SHOW APRIL 9 TH 2017 AM: Can I ask you first of all were we told by the Americans not to send Boris Johnson to Moscow? PP: Well, it s quite clear that events with regards to Syria have moved
More informationNGOS, GOVERNMENTS AND THE WTO
John R. Magnus November 6, 2000 Dewey Ballantine LLP Presentation to Global Business Dialogue: NGOS, GOVERNMENTS AND THE WTO -- Speaking Notes -- Greetings to you all, and hearty thanks to Judge for including
More informationKEYNOTE STATEMENT Mr. Ivan Šimonović, Assistant Secretary General for Human Rights. human rights while countering terrorism ********
CTITF Working Group on Protecting Human Rights while Countering Terrorism Expert Symposium On Securing the Fundamental Principles of a Fair Trial for Persons Accused of Terrorist Offences Bangkok, Thailand
More informationDeutscher Bundestag. 1st Committee of Inquiry. in the 18th electoral term. Hearing of Experts. Surveillance Reform After Snowden.
Deutscher Bundestag 1st Committee of Inquiry in the 18th electoral term Hearing of Experts Surveillance Reform After Snowden September 8, 2016 Written Statement of Timothy H. Edgar Senior Fellow Watson
More informationSubmission to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee on the New Zealand Intelligence and Security Bill
Submission to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee on the New Zealand Intelligence and Security Bill Contact Persons Janet Anderson-Bidois Chief Legal Adviser New Zealand Human Rights Commission
More information(Straw) Man in the Middle:
(Straw) Man in the Middle: A Modest Post-Snowden Proposal Brussels, Belgium Jacob Appelbaum [redacted] 10 December 2015 Jacob Appelbaum ([redacted]) (Straw) Man in the Middle: 10 December 2015 1 / 26 Post-Snowden?
More informationTHE PRIME MINISTER'S LUNCHEON FOR
THE PRIME MINISTER'S LUNCHEON FOR THE FEDERAL GERMAN CHANCELLOR FRIDAY 11 MAY AND HIS DELEGATION 1979 Mr. Chancellor, I have greatly valued the informal consultations which we have had during these two
More informationTekSavvy Solutions Inc.
TekSavvy Solutions Inc. Law Enforcement Guide TekSavvy Solutions Inc. ( TekSavvy ) is a provider of Internet access, voice telephony, and related telecommunication services. We retain subscriber information
More informationStatelessness: The Impact of International Law and Current Challenges
International Law Programme Meeting Summary Statelessness: The Impact of International Law and Current Challenges Mark Manly UNHCR Dr Laura van Waas Statelessness Program, Tilburg University Adrian Berry
More informationI. Does International Law Prohibit the U.S. Government from Monitoring Foreign Citizens in Foreign Countries?
Statement to the Privacy & Civil Liberties Oversight Board Eric A. Posner University of Chicago Law School March 14, 2014 You have asked me for my views on U.S. data collection efforts under Section 702
More informationThe Right to Privacy in the Digital Age: Meeting Report
The Right to Privacy in the Digital Age: Meeting Report In light of the recent revelations regarding mass surveillance, interception and data collection the Permanent Missions of Austria, Brazil, Germany,
More informationConsistency with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990: Outer Space and High Altitude Activities Bill
LEGAL ADVICE LPA 01 01 21 7 September 2016 Hon Christopher Finlayson QC, Attorney-General Consistency with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990: Outer Space and High Altitude Activities Bill Purpose
More informationConducting surveillance in a public place
Ministerial Policy Statement Conducting surveillance in a public place Summary It is lawful for the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) and the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service (NZSIS)
More informationInvestigatory Powers Bill
Investigatory Powers Bill [AS AMENDED ON REPORT] CONTENTS PART 1 GENERAL PRIVACY PROTECTIONS Overview and general privacy duties 1 Overview of Act 2 General duties in relation to privacy Prohibitions against
More informationSpying on humanitarians: implications for organisations and beneficiaries
Spying on humanitarians: implications for organisations and beneficiaries Executive Summary The global communications surveillance mandates of American, British and other Western intelligence agencies
More informationElectronic Privacy Information Center September 24, 2001
Electronic Privacy Information Center September 24, 2001 Analysis of Provisions of the Proposed Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001 Affecting the Privacy of Communications and Personal Information In response to
More informationInvestigatory Powers Bill Briefing
Investigatory Powers Bill Briefing What is the Investigatory Powers Bill? Running to 245 pages, the Investigatory Powers Bill is an attempt to establish a clear framework for the authorisation and use
More informationStatement for the European Parliament, Temporary Committee on the ECHELON interception system, meeting of Thursday, 22 March, 2001, Brussels.
Statement for the European Parliament, Temporary Committee on the ECHELON interception system, meeting of Thursday, 22 March, 2001, Brussels. Session on exchange of views on Legal Affairs, Human Rights
More informationInternational Approaches to Conflict Resolution in Libya
Middle East and North Africa Programme Meeting Summary International Approaches to Conflict Resolution in Libya Libya Working Group 15 April 2015 The views expressed in this document are the sole responsibility
More informationCounter-Terrorism Bill
EXPLANATORY NOTES Explanatory notes to the Bill, prepared by the Home Office, will be published separately as HL Bill 6 EN. EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS Lord West of Spithead has made the following
More informationLEGISLATIVE CONSENT MEMORANDUM INVESTIGATORY POWERS BILL
LEGISLATIVE CONSENT MEMORANDUM INVESTIGATORY POWERS BILL Background 1. This memorandum has been lodged by Michael Matheson, Cabinet Secretary for Justice, under Rule 9B.3.1(a) of the Parliament s Standing
More informationPRO/CON: Is Snowden a whistle-blower or just irresponsible?
PRO/CON: Is Snowden a whistle-blower or just irresponsible? By McClatchy-Tribune News Service, adapted by Newsela staff on 02.04.14 Word Count 1,340 Demonstrators rally at the U.S. Capitol to protest spying
More information[2015] UKIPTrib 13_77-H Case Nos: IPT/13/77/H, IPT/13/92/CH, IPT/13/ /H, IPT/13/194/CH, IPT/13/204/CH. Before :
[2015] UKIPTrib 13_77-H Case Nos: IPT/13/77/H, IPT/13/92/CH, IPT/13/168-173/H, IPT/13/194/CH, IPT/13/204/CH IN THE INVESTIGATORY POWERS TRIBUNAL P.O. Box 33220 London SW1H 9ZQ Date: 06/02/2015 Before :
More informationJudges, Parliament and the Government the new relationship Transcript of a lecture by Rt Hon Lord Woolf
Judges, Parliament and the Government the new relationship Transcript of a lecture by Rt Hon Lord Woolf Thank you very much for that over-generous introduction. I m afraid I don t share your confidence
More informationCCPA Analysis Of Bill C-36 An Act To Combat Terrorism
research analysis solutions CCPA Analysis Of Bill C-36 An Act To Combat Terrorism INTRODUCTION The Canadian government has a responsibility to protect Canadians from actual and potential human rights abuses
More informationFINAL WORKING DOCUMENT
EUROPEAN PARLIAMT 2009-2014 Committee on Foreign Affairs 20.11.2013 FINAL WORKING DOCUMT on Foreign Policy Aspects of the Inquiry on Electronic Mass Surveillance of EU Citizens Committee on Foreign Affairs
More informationAMBASSADOR THOMAS R. PICKERING DECEMBER 9, 2010 Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties of the House Committee on the
AMBASSADOR THOMAS R. PICKERING DECEMBER 9, 2010 Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties of the House Committee on the Judiciary Hearing on Civil Liberties and National Security
More informationTelecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill
Government Bill Explanatory note General policy statement This Bill repeals and replaces the Capability) Act 2004. The main objectives of the Bill are to ensure that the interception obligations imposed
More informationShort Guide 04. Edward Jacobs, Judge of the Upper Tribunal. The ABC of Effective Procedural Applications The Basics of Tribunal Representation
Short Guide 04 The ABC of Effective Procedural Applications The Basics of Tribunal Representation Edward Jacobs, Judge of the Upper Tribunal Public Law Project Contents The Public Law Project (PLP) is
More informationANDREW MARR SHOW 27 TH JANUARY 2019 SIMON COVENEY
ANDREW MARR SHOW 27 TH JANUARY 2019 SIMON COVENEY AM: Simon Coveney is the Foreign Minister and Tanaiste or Deputy Prime Minister of the Irish Republic and he s with me now. Simon Coveney, welcome. SC:
More informationREGULATION OF INVESTIGATORY POWERS BILL SECOND READING BRIEFING
REGULATION OF INVESTIGATORY POWERS BILL SECOND READING BRIEFING INTRODUCTION 1.1. In its report, Under Surveillance, JUSTICE came to the overall conclusion that the present legislative and procedural framework
More informationOpening speech by Markus Löning Former German Commissioner for Human Rights Economic Freedom Network Asia, Manila, November 22 nd 2016
Opening speech by Markus Löning Former German Commissioner for Human Rights Economic Freedom Network Asia, Manila, November 22 nd 2016 Good morning everybody. It s a great honor to be here and it s a great
More informationtinitrd~tat s~fnatf WASHINGTON, DC 20510
tinitrd~tat s~fnatf WASHINGTON, DC 20510 December 14, 2005 Dear Colleague, Prior to the Thanksgiving recess, several Senators expressed strong opposition to the draft Patriot Act reauthorization conference
More informationCommittee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs WORKING DOCUMENT 4
EUROPEAN PARLIAMT 2009-2014 Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs 12.12.2013 WORKING DOCUMT 4 on US Surveillance activities with respect to EU data and its possible legal implications
More informationThe Lobbying Act 2014
The Lobbying Act 2014 Introduction This briefing provides an overview of Part 2 of the Transparency of Lobbying, Non-party Campaigning and Trade Union Administration Act 2014, which came into force on
More informationEUROPEAN PARLIAMENT DRAFT OPINION. Committee on Petitions PROVISIONAL. 6 September of the Committee on Petitions
EUROPEAN PARLIAMT 1999 Committee on Petitions 2004 PROVISIONAL 6 September 2000 DRAFT OPINION of the Committee on Petitions for the Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs
More informationHouse Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs
Australian Broadcasting Corporation submission to the House Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs and to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee on their respective inquiries
More informationTHE ANDREW MARR SHOW 24 TH APRIL 2016 THERESA MAY. AM: Good morning to you, Home Secretary. TM: Good morning, Andrew.
1 THE ANDREW MARR SHOW 24 TH APRIL 2016 THERESA MAY AM: Good morning to you, Home Secretary. TM: Good morning, Andrew. AM: If we stay in the EU will immigration go up or down? TM: Well, first of all nobody
More informationSecurity Council Counter-Terrorism-Committee, New York, 24 October 2005.
Statement by Mr Martin Scheinin, Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms while Countering Terrorism. Security Council Counter-Terrorism-Committee, New
More informationInterview with Philippe Kirsch, President of the International Criminal Court *
INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNALS Interview with Philippe Kirsch, President of the International Criminal Court * Judge Philippe Kirsch (Canada) is president of the International Criminal Court in The Hague
More informationResponse to invitation for submissions on issues relevant to the proportionality of bulk powers
Response to invitation for submissions on issues relevant to the proportionality of bulk powers Written submission by Dr. Daragh Murray, Prof. Pete Fussey and Prof. Maurice Sunkin QC (Hon), members of
More informationThe forensic use of bioinformation: ethical issues
The forensic use of bioinformation: ethical issues A guide to the Report 01 The Nuffield Council on Bioethics has published a Report, The forensic use of bioinformation: ethical issues. It considers the
More informationRussia and the United Kingdom in the Changing World
Speech of Mr. Igor Ivanov at the dinner hosted by the Defence and Security Forum London, 14 March 2019 Russia and the United Kingdom in the Changing World Our world has never stopped changing. However,
More informationPALAIS DES NATIONS 1211 GENEVA 10, SWITZERLAND TEL: / FAX:
PALAIS DES NATIONS 1211 GENEVA 10, SWITZERLAND www.ohchr.org TEL: +41 22 917 9543 / +41 22 917 9738 FAX: +41 22 917 9008 E-MAIL: registry@ohchr.org Mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and
More informationANDREW MARR SHOW 17 TH DECEMBER DIANE ABBOTT, MP Shadow Home Secretary. AM: I m just looking for specifics. DA: Yeah and specifics.
1 ANDREW MARR SHOW 17 TH DECEMBER 2017 Shadow Home Secretary AM: Welcome Diane Abbott. Can I just ask you about the Keir Starmer menu as it were for after we leave the EU? He said that we d have a really
More informationThe National Security Agency s Warrantless Wiretaps
The National Security Agency s Warrantless Wiretaps In 2005, the press revealed that President George W. Bush had authorized government wiretaps without a court warrant of U.S. citizens suspected of terrorist
More informationFOURTH SECTION. CASE OF LIBERTY AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM. (Application no /00) JUDGMENT STRASBOURG. 1 July 2008
FOURTH SECTION CASE OF LIBERTY AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM (Application no. 58243/00) JUDGMENT STRASBOURG 1 July 2008 This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 2 of
More informationMandate of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
HAUT-COMMISSARIAT AUX DROITS DE L HOMME OFFICE OF THE HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS PALAIS DES NATIONS 1211 GENEVA 10, SWITZERLAND www.ohchr.org TEL: +41 22 917 9359 / +41 22 917 9407 FAX: +41 22
More informationChapter 11 The use of intelligence agencies capabilities for law enforcement purposes
Chapter 11 The use of intelligence agencies capabilities for law enforcement purposes INTRODUCTION 11.1 Earlier this year, the report of the first Independent Review of Intelligence and Security was tabled
More informationThe 1995 EC Directive on data protection under official review feedback so far
The 1995 EC Directive on data protection under official review feedback so far [Published in Privacy Law & Policy Reporter, 2002, volume 9, pages 126 129] Lee A Bygrave The Commission of the European Communities
More informationThe Changing Nature of Eritrea s Opposition Politics
Africa Programme Meeting Summary The Changing Nature of Eritrea s Opposition Politics Speaker: Chairman, Eritrean Congress Party Respondent: Jason Mosley Associate Fellow, Africa Programme, Chatham House
More informationTHE ANDREW MARR SHOW INTERVIEW: THERESA MAY, MP HOME SECRETARY NOVEMBER 11 th 2012
PLEASE NOTE THE ANDREW MARR SHOW MUST BE CREDITED IF ANY PART OF THIS TRANSCRIPT IS USED THE ANDREW MARR SHOW INTERVIEW: THERESA MAY, MP HOME SECRETARY NOVEMBER 11 th 2012 My next guest, Theresa May, enthused
More informationCommunications Security Establishment Commissioner. Annual Report
Communications Security Establishment Commissioner Annual Report 2001 2002 Office of the Communications Security Establishment Commissioner P.O. Box 1984 Station B Ottawa, Ontario K1P 5R5 Tel: (613) 992-3044
More informationTHE HON RICHARD MARLES MP SHADOW MINISTER FOR DEFENCE MEMBER FOR CORIO
E&OE TRANSCRIPT TV INTERVIEW SKY NEWS LIVE CREDLIN MONDAY, 16 JULY 2018 THE HON RICHARD MARLES MP SHADOW MINISTER FOR DEFENCE MEMBER FOR CORIO SUBJECTS: Newspoll; by-elections; Israel; defence spending;
More informationInterview with Victor Pickard Author, America s Battle for Media Democracy. For podcast release Monday, December 15, 2014
Interview with Victor Pickard Author, America s Battle for Media Democracy For podcast release Monday, December 15, 2014 KENNEALLY: Under the United States Constitution, the First Amendment protects free
More informationBULK POWERS IN THE INVESTIGATORY POWERS BILL:
BULK POWERS IN THE INVESTIGATORY POWERS BILL: The Question Of Trust Remains Unanswered September 2016 1/10 Introduction We are on the brink of introducing the most pervasive and intrusive surveillance
More informationUK Counterterrorism Legislation: Impact on Humanitarian, Peacebuilding and Development Action
International Law Programme and International Security Department Roundtable Summary UK Counterterrorism Legislation: Impact on Humanitarian, Peacebuilding and Development Action 11 November 2015 The views
More informationSpeech to SOLACE National Elections Conference 16 January 2014 Peter Wardle
Opening remarks Thank you. Speech to SOLACE National Elections Conference 16 January 2014 Peter Wardle It s good to have the chance to speak to the SOLACE Elections Conference again. I will focus today
More informationTHE ANDREW MARR SHOW INTERVIEW: ALEX SALMOND, MSP FIRST MINISTER OF SCOTLAND OCTOBER 20 th 2013
PLEASE NOTE THE ANDREW MARR SHOW MUST BE CREDITED IF ANY PART OF THIS TRANSCRIPT IS USED THE ANDREW MARR SHOW INTERVIEW: ALEX SALMOND, MSP FIRST MINISTER OF SCOTLAND OCTOBER 20 th 2013 A year today, the
More informationAndrew Blowers There is basically then, from what you re saying, a fairly well defined scientific method?
Earth in crisis: environmental policy in an international context The Impact of Science AUDIO MONTAGE: Headlines on climate change science and policy The problem of climate change is both scientific and
More information1 TONY BLAIR ANDREW MARR SHOW, 29 TH MAY, 2016 TONY BLAIR
1 ANDREW MARR SHOW, 29 TH MAY, 2016 AM: I spoke to him a little earlier this morning and I began by asking him about the big story of the day, whether the current level of EU migration is sustainable.
More informationPROGRAM FOR PUBLIC CONSULTATION / ANWAR SADAT CHAIR
PROGRAM FOR PUBLIC CONSULTATION / ANWAR SADAT CHAIR 1 OVERVIEW Iran has been engaged in tense negotiations with the United States and five other nations (the five permanent members of the United Nations
More informationVienna Parliamentary Forum on Intelligence-Security. Giovanni Buttarelli
Vienna Parliamentary Forum on Intelligence-Security Vienna Hofburg, 6 May 2015 Giovanni Buttarelli European Data Protection Supervisor First of all 1, may I thank Andreas Schieder, Chair of SPÖ Parliamentary
More informationInterviews. Interview With Ambasssador Gregory L. Schulte, U.S. Permanent Representative to the In. Agency
Interview With Ambasssador Gregory L. Schulte, U.S. Permanent Representative to the International Atomic Energy Agency Interviews Interviewed by Miles A. Pomper As U.S permanent representative to the International
More informationPolice and crime panels. Guidance on confirmation hearings
Police and crime panels Guidance on confirmation hearings Community safety, policing and fire services This guidance has been prepared by the Centre for Public Scrutiny and the Local Government Association.
More informationThe following text is an edited transcript of Professor. Fisher s remarks at the November 13 meeting. Afghanistan: Negotiation in the Face of Terror
1 The following text is an edited transcript of Professor Fisher s remarks at the November 13 meeting. Afghanistan: Negotiation in the Face of Terror Roger Fisher Whether negotiation will be helpful or
More informationIN THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. Application No /13. Big Brother Watch and others v. the United Kingdom
IN THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS Application No. 58170/13 Big Brother Watch and others v. the United Kingdom WRITTEN COMMENTS OF THE OPEN SOCIETY JUSTICE INITIATIVE 1. These written comments are intended
More information6.805/6.806/STS.085, Ethics and Law on the Electronic Frontier Lecture 7: Profiling and Datamining
6.805/6.806/STS.085, Ethics and Law on the Electronic Frontier Lecture 7: Profiling and Datamining Lecturer: Danny Weitzner Cars and Planes : Profiling and Data-mining, post 9/11 Discussion - Midterm Logistics
More informationSTATEMENT STEVEN G. BRADBURY ACTING ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL OFFICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
STATEMENT OF STEVEN G. BRADBURY ACTING ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL OFFICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME, TERRORISM, AND HOMELAND SECURITY COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
More informationDR LIAM FOX ANDREW MARR SHOW 18 TH DECEMBER, 2016
ANDREW MARR SHOW 18 TH DECEMBER, 2016 1 AM: A year ago I had you on the show and you announced that you were going to campaign to leave the EU and you were very clear about what that meant. You said no
More informationDiscussion seminar: charitable initiatives for journalism and media summary
Discussion seminar: charitable initiatives for journalism and media summary Date/Time: Monday 23 June, 14.15-17.15 Location: Boardroom in University of Westminster's main Regent Street building, 309 Regent
More informationStatement for the Record. House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security. Hearing on Reauthorizing the Patriot Act
Statement for the Record House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security Hearing on Reauthorizing the Patriot Act Statement for the Record Robert S. Litt General Counsel Office of
More informationStatement of. L. Britt Snider. Subcommittee on Intelligence Community Management House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
Statement of L. Britt Snider Subcommittee on Intelligence Community Management House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence October 22, 2009 Madam Chairwoman, Ms. Myrick, Members of the Subcommittee,
More informationFreedom of Information Policy
Audience Named person responsible for monitoring Freedom of Information Policy All Staff & Governors Head Agreed by Personnel Committee June 2015 Agreed by Governing Body July 2015 Date to be Reviewed
More information