Big Brother Watch, Open Rights Group and Index on Censorship made a submission to the court, arguing against proceedings taking in place in secret and in favour of open justice. Today, the Tribunal has rejected the Home Office’s application, stating it did not accept “that the revelation of the bare details of the case would be damaging to the public interest or prejudicial to national security”.

Neither myself nor, I’m assuming, the person you’re replying to wants to have the government with their grubby little fingers in our data.
What the person you’re replying to was saying had literally nothing to do with what you asked. Has to do with the above. It’s shocking that a UK court actually made a sane call. In this case, they decided that no, the government wasn’t entitled to a closed case. That the proceedings would be open, and the details would be available to the public. Like in a functioning democracy.

‘Political leadership’ doesn’t define reality. People are completely justified to assert rights even if they aren’t expressly approved by big daddy g’vmt. That is, in fact, exactly how most of the rights enshrined in law got there in the first place. The Magna Carta itself had to be forced upon the king through the threat of rebellion by the dukes.

It’s not enshrined anywhere but it should be covered under the Humans Rights Act of 1998 in the UK that outlines what constitutes the right to privacy. Since this Backdoor request has the potential to conflict with privacy rights, not only us the public but many people who work on these issues should be given access.