BIG BROTHER WATCH AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM JUDGMENT
THE LAW.............................................................................................................107
I. EXHAUSTION OF DOMESTIC REMEDIES ............................................107
A. The parties’ submissions............................................................................107
1. The Government ...............................................................................................107
2. The applicants ...................................................................................................108
B. The submissions of the third party .............................................................109
C. The Court’s assessment..............................................................................109
1. General principles .............................................................................................109
2. Application of those principles to the case at hand ..........................................111
II. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 8 OF THE CONVENTION ....117
A. The section 8(4) regime .............................................................................118
1. Admissibility.....................................................................................................118
2. Merits................................................................................................................118
(a) The parties’ submissions ..........................................................................118
(i) The applicants ....................................................................................118
(ii) The Government................................................................................120
(b) The submissions of the third parties.........................................................124
(i) Article 19............................................................................................124
(ii) Access Now.......................................................................................124
(iii) ENNHRI...........................................................................................124
(iv) The Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights (“HFHR”) ..................125
(v) The International Commission of Jurists (“ICJ”)..............................125
(vi) Open Society Justice Initiative (“OSJI”)..........................................125
(vii) European Digital Rights (“EDRi”) and other organisations
active in the field of human rights in the information society ..........125
(viii) The Law Society of England and Wales ........................................126
(c) The Court’s assessment ............................................................................126
(i) General principles relating to secret measures of surveillance,
including the interception of communications ..................................126
(ii) Existing case-law on the bulk interception of communications........129
(iii) The test to be applied in the present case.........................................130
B. The intelligence sharing regime .................................................................150
1. Admissibility.....................................................................................................150
(a) The parties’ submissions ..........................................................................150
(b) The Court’s assessment............................................................................151
2. Merits................................................................................................................153
(a) The parties’ submissions ..........................................................................153
(i) The applicants ....................................................................................153
(ii) The Government................................................................................153
(b) The submissions of the third parties.........................................................155