KENNEDY v. THE UNITED KINGDOM JUDGMENT
29
THE LAW
I. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 8 OF THE CONVENTION
99. The applicant complained that his communications were being
unlawfully intercepted in order to intimidate him and undermine his
business activities, in violation of Article 8 of the Convention, which reads
as follows:
“1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and
his correspondence.
2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right
except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society
in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the
country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals,
or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.”
100. He further argued that the regime established under RIPA for
authorising interception of internal communications did not comply with the
requirements of Article 8 § 2 of the Convention.
A. Admissibility
1. The parties' submissions
a. The Government
101. The Government argued that the applicant had failed to advance a
general challenge to the Convention-compliance of the RIPA provisions on
interception of internal communications before the IPT, and that he had
accordingly failed to exhaust domestic remedies in respect of this
complaint. They pointed out that at the same time as the applicant was
pursuing his complaint with the IPT, the British-Irish Rights Watch and
others case was also under consideration by the IPT. Pursuant to the
arguments of the parties in that case, the IPT issued a general public ruling
of the IPT on the compatibility of the RIPA scheme as regards external
communications with Article 8 (see paragraphs 96 to 97 above). No such
ruling on the subject of internal communications was issued in the
applicant's case.
102. The Government emphasised that the applicant's Grounds of Claim
and Complaint alleged interception of the applicant's business calls and a
violation of Article 8 on the facts of the applicant's case. The Government
noted that the paragraphs of the Grounds of Claim and Complaint relied
upon by the applicant in his submissions to this Court to support his