“as David Anderson QC, the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, has noted, make the UK the only state in the Five Eyes alliance (which includes the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand) that does not vest the power to approve surveillance activities in the judiciary.”
This sounds more like a coup than the passing of a bill. Reading the IPB review by David Anderson Q.C. is incredibly alarming regarding UK’s obligations towards the ICCPR and particularly regarding Human Rights and EUHR; the IPB not only significantly compromises the latter, but weakens — if not incapacitates — the Judiciary and effectively defeats relevant accountability. The UK’s denial of its ICCPR obligations and vulneration of the EUHR framework alone, sets it de facto apart from the EU.
Considering the dangerous overreaches that the bill establishes, defeating the accountability inherent to democratic principles and guarantees, as well as judicial principles, is particularly disturbing. Also that the opposition’s abstention to vote was instrumental to passing the bill, is no lesser disturbing precedent, and should be strongly questioned by British civil society.
The US Patriot Act has been controversial and had disastrous effects for Human Rights, International Law, and civil liberties for one and a half decade. It has established a regime that can violate Human Rights, national Sovereignty of any nation state, and International Law obligations without jurisdictional limitations — along with introducing and legitimizing unlawful categories such as “unlawful combatant”, “imminent threat”, “rendition”, “indefinite detention”, “enhanced interrogation”, etc. Now the UK has joined the US in asserting its right to act without judicial oversight, to ignore Human Rights obligations and to comply with International Law, as well as to act well beyond its borders.
I surely hope for strong rejection and repudiation of the passing of this bill by EU countries whose population sovereignty and legality will be compromised by the enacting of the IPB. This is frankly the worst legal precedent to be set within the realm of the EU in a long time, and the impact of it is yet to be fully estimated.