Application no. 43246/16 Jenny JONES and Caroline LUCAS against the United Kingdom (European Court of Human Rights)

Last Updated on September 22, 2021 by LawEuro

Published on 23 August 2021

FOURTH SECTION

Application no. 43246/16
Jenny JONES and Caroline LUCAS
against the United Kingdom
lodged on 19 July 2016
communicated on 5 August 2021

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE

The application primarily concerns the United Kingdom’s bulk interception regime under section 8(4) of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA). The first applicant is a Member of Parliament and the second applicant is a life peer. They challenged the interception regimes under section 8(1) and section 8(4) of RIPA before the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT) on the basis that insofar as they permitted the interception, storage and surveillance of Parliamentary communications they were, inter alia, inconsistent with their rights under Articles 8 and 10 of the Convention. The IPT accepted that the Wilson doctrine (which restricts the police and intelligence services from tapping the telephones of members of the House of Commons and House of Lords) applied to targeted interception under section 8(1) of RIPA but not to bulk interception under section 8(4). Nevertheless, it held that the regime for the interception of parliamentarians’ communications was in accordance with the law. It was sufficient to protect such communications and nothing further was required by the Convention.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. Can the applicants properly claim to be victims of the alleged violations?

2. Having regard to the judgment of the Court in Big Brother Watch and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 58170/13 and 2 others, 25 May 2021, has there been a violation of the applicants’ rights under Articles 8 and/or 10 of the Convention by virtue of the operation either of the section 8(1) or the section 8(4) regimes?

3. Does either Article 8 or Article 10 require additional protection for the communications of Parliamentarians?

APPENDIX