329 pages, 27 schedules - a huge Bill which in normal times would receive months of pre-legislative / legislative scrutiny, and dozens of amendments, most of them tabled or accepted by Government. /2
These are not normal times of course, and I am sure the urgency is justified. But having legislated in haste (and reportedly, without divisions), surely Parliament must have a chance to revisit it before 2 years are up. /3
This Bill is after all quite out of the ordinary in the powers that it asks Parliament to confer. /4
Detailed and informed commentary on this platform will be of huge value to those of us seeking to understand the Bill. /5
Please tag any contribution #CoronavirusBill for ease of access! / ends
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
My independent review of the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 is published today. The Act generally works well, but my review examines some specific proposals for change. .gov.uk/government/pub…
A one-page summary of my #IPA2016 review is here. Tl;dr the Act has worked well so far, but an amending Bill should address some specific points and by 2030, technological change will require us to rewrite the vocabulary of surveillance and its oversight. https://t.co/ZmqH05jSpggov.uk/government/pub…
The rule of law is an undefined statutory concept. Lord Keen, who resigned over the “limited and specific” breach of international law in #IMA2021, and I sought clarity from our Law Officers in @HLConstitution https://t.co/aK3jpkk2ZL (0905:45-0920:15)./1Parliamentlive.tv parliamentlive.tv/event/index/5b…
There are well-established international definitions by the CoE Venice Commission and the EU (whose conditionality regulation of 2020 was the subject of a 25-judge ruling recently). So it would not be impossible to arrive at our own definition. /2
But it is clear from the Law Officers’ replies this morning that there is no common view within government, even though differences in relation to the issue of international law may have been pragmatically resolved. /3
I've been looking at the Foreign Influence Registration Scheme, added in its current form to the #NationalSecurityBill on the last day of its passage through the Commons. No html version available yet but it's Part 3 (ss 62-81) of the Bill: bills.parliament.uk/publications/4…. /1
I think I understand why the activities of specified persons (e.g. China, Russia, Iran and entities they control) need to be registered (cll 62-65). Hostile states need careful watching and hopefully this (and the penalties for non-compliance) will help. /2
Less obvious is why ALL governments and ALL bodies incorporated outside the UK should be required to register "political influence activities" including contacting an MP or issuing public communications aimed at influencing UK government decisions (cll 66-70). /3
The long-awaited Ouseley report into closed material proceedings has now been published. tl;dr - CMPs have enabled more cases to be tried, but special advocates need better resources.assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/upl…
Most of the concerns expressed during the passage of the #JSA2013 are found not to have been realised in practice. But there are 20 practical recommendations for improvement of the system. /2
The #NIProtocolBill is here, together with the claimed legal “justification” which is the doctrine of necessity. Sounds thin to me, not to say threadbare. gov.uk/government/new…
In short - necessity rarely excuses a breach, and only when (inter alia) the State’s act is the only way to safeguard an essential interest against a grave and imminent peril, and when no other essential interest is seriously impaired by the breach: jusmundi.com/en/document/wi…
Useful 🧵 on today’s #CJEU Dwyer judgment - a notorious murder in Ireland that was only solved because location data was routinely saved for 2 yrs in case police needed access in a criminal investigation. /1
This enabled the crime to be pinned on a previously unsuspected architect, whose professional movements over a long period corresponded with those of the incriminating phone. /2
I was an expert witness in the case so will not comment further on a judgment that largely follows #CJEU precedent, whatever you think of it (other approaches are available: see #ECtHR). /3