BIG BROTHER WATCH AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM JUDGMENT
Plasterk, Center For Democracy & Technology, European Network of
National Human Rights Institutions and the Equality and Human Rights
Commission, the Helsinki Foundation For Human Rights, the International
Commission of Jurists, Open Society Justice Initiative, The Law Society of
England and Wales and Project Moore. In the second case, leave to
intervene was granted to the Center For Democracy & Technology, the
Helsinki Foundation For Human Rights, the International Commission of
Jurists, the National Union of Journalists and the Media Lawyers’
Association. In the third case, leave to intervene was granted to Article 19,
the Electronic Privacy Information Center and to the Equality and Human
Rights Commission.
5. On 4 July 2017, a Chamber of the First Section decided to join the
applications and hold an oral hearing. That hearing took place in public in
the Human Rights Building, Strasbourg, on 7 November 2017. On
13 September 2018, a Chamber of that Section, composed of
Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos, Kristina Pardalos, Aleš Pejchal, Ksenija
Turković, Armen Harutyunyan, Pauliine Koskelo and Tim Eicke, judges,
and Abel Campos, Section Registrar, gave judgment. The Chamber
unanimously declared inadmissible the complaints made by the applicants
in the third of the joined cases concerning Article 6, Article 10, in so far as
the applicants relied on their status as NGOs, and Article 14, and declared
admissible the remainder of the complaints made by those applicants. By a
majority, it declared admissible the complaints made by the applicants in the
first and second of the joined cases. Also by a majority, it held that there
had been a violation of Articles 8 and 10 of the Convention in respect of
both the section 8(4) regime and the Chapter II regime, and it held that there
had been no violation of Article 8 of the Convention in respect of the
intelligence sharing regime. The partly concurring, partly dissenting opinion
of Judge Koskelo, joined by Judge Turković, and the joint partly dissenting
and partly concurring opinion of Judges Pardalos and Eicke were annexed
to the judgment.
6. On 12 December 2018 and 11 December 2018 respectively, the
applicants in the first and third of the joined cases requested the referral of
the case to the Grand Chamber in accordance with Article 43 of the
Convention. On 4 February 2019, the panel of the Grand Chamber granted
that request.
7. The composition of the Grand Chamber was determined according to
the provisions of Article 26 §§ 4 and 5 of the Convention and Rule 24 of the
Rules of Court.
8. The applicants and the Government each filed observations (Rule 59
§ 1) on the admissibility and merits of the case.
9. The President of the Grand Chamber granted leave to intervene in the
written procedure, in accordance with Article 36 § 2 of the Convention and
Rule 44 § 3 of the Rules, to the Governments of France, Norway and the
2