Does UK's surveillance legislation infringe on international human rights norms?

Yes, UK's surveillance legislation has been criticised for potentially infringing on international human rights norms.

The UK's surveillance legislation, particularly the Investigatory Powers Act 2016, has been a subject of intense debate and criticism. This legislation grants sweeping powers to UK intelligence agencies and law enforcement for the purpose of national security and crime prevention. However, these powers have raised serious concerns about the potential infringement on international human rights norms, particularly the right to privacy.

The right to privacy is enshrined in several international human rights instruments, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights. The Investigatory Powers Act allows for bulk collection of communications data, hacking into computers and mobile phones, and collection of internet connection records without requiring a specific target or suspicion. This has been criticised as a disproportionate interference with the right to privacy.

In 2018, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that UK's surveillance programmes violated the European Convention on Human Rights, specifically the right to privacy and freedom of expression. The court found that the bulk interception regime was not "in accordance with the law" due to lack of oversight and safeguards from abuse.

Moreover, the legislation has been criticised for its potential impact on other human rights, such as freedom of expression and freedom of association. The fear of surveillance could deter individuals from expressing dissenting views or associating with certain groups, thereby chilling free speech and democratic participation.

The UK government has defended the legislation, arguing that it is necessary and proportionate for national security and crime prevention. They have also pointed to the oversight mechanisms in place, such as the Investigatory Powers Commissioner, to prevent abuse. However, critics argue that these mechanisms are insufficient and lack transparency.

In conclusion, while the UK's surveillance legislation is aimed at protecting national security, it has been criticised for potentially infringing on international human rights norms. The balance between security and human rights remains a contentious issue in the UK and around the world.