Did Snowden lead Britain to abolish human rights?
Hypothesis: Britain’s plans to abolish Human Rights legislation and withdraw from the EU are a direct reaction to Edward Snowden’s leaks revealing the UK’s massive illegal surveillance network.
Yesterday, media outlets celebrated the second anniversary of the first published Snowden disclosures on 5 June 2013. Fearing disclosure of Britain’s own classified programmes, Prime Minister David Cameron had the Guardian’s copy of the Snowden files destroyed on 20 July 2013. The BBC was issued with a notice not to report on the leaks, and Cameron threatened to issue the Guardian with a similar notice in October 2013.
While Cameron had intentions to abolish the Human Rights Act since at least 2005, it wasn’t until 3 October 2014 that the Guardian published Chris Grayling MP’s drastic plans to abandon the European Convention on Human Rights. Even the Tory party is split on this plan.
Grayling was certainly aware of GCHQ’s operations. The highest level of RIPA powers covering interception of a communication can only be authorised by a warrant from the Home Secretary or Justice Secretary, who at time were Theresa May and Chris Grayling, respectively. The Guardian reports that the extent of such warrants are significant:
According to the ISC’s February 2015 report, there are currently 19 warrants in place that cumulatively authorise the interception of billions of communications each day.
If May and Grayling were not aware of the precise details of GCHQ’s programmes, they were certainly made aware post-Snowden, along with the GCHQ’s fears that the bulk collection systems authorised by May and Grayling, it made public, would almost certainly be ruled illegal on privacy grounds under the European Convention for Human Rights.
It is highly likely, therefore, that by October 2014 when Grayling published “Protecting human rights in the UK”, he was aware that:
- The EU courts would rule that programmes he signed off on were illegal
- The Tories’ plans to abolish the Human Rights Act would not save GCHQ programmes from EU court rulings
- Only three things could save GCHQ at this point: Making European court rulings non-binding on Britain, withdrawing from the ECHR, or leaving the EU. In his document, Grayling recommends all three of these.
Consequently, the Tory party manifesto for 2015 made unexpected new pledges:
- To re-negotiate an opt-out from the European Court of Human Rights
- To hold a referendum for Britain leave the EU
The Tories had long suggested abolishing the Human Rights Act, which would prevent citizens from suing for human rights in UK courts, but would have still allowed European courts to impose legally binding rulings on the UK.
Without the Snowden disclosures, GCHQ’s surveillance systems would still be classified and could operate without fear of the European courts ruling them illegal. Snowden placed GCHQ in direct threat that could only be stopped if the Conservatives came to power with a plan to quickly withdraw Britain from the European Court of Human Rights, and that’s exactly what happened.
However, there’s the small question of whether or not Grayling would have tried to get rid of the EU courts anyway.
Pre-Snowden, on 22 November 2012, Grayling was tasked with implementing an EU ruling of five years previous that at least some prisoners have the right to vote. When MPs voted against it, Grayling suggested a draft bill that would effectively delay the problem until the next election, and suggested that it wasn’t necessarily illegal to ignore ECHR rulings, that the UK could do so if it accepted the political fallout. This suggests he may have already been quite open to disobeying the EU.
Tomorrow, back to whining about web standards.