Latest news with #LordJusticeSingh
The Guardian
07-04-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
UK Home Office loses attempt to keep legal battle with Apple secret
The UK has lost an attempt to keep details of a legal battle with Apple away from the public. The investigatory powers tribunal, which investigates whether the domestic intelligence services have acted unlawfully, on Monday rejected a bid by the Home Office to withhold from the public the 'bare details' of the case. A judgment from Lord Justice Singh, president of the investigatory powers tribunal, and Mr Justice Johnson, on Monday confirmed some details of the case for the first time. They confirmed that the case relates to a legal challenge brought against the Home Office by Apple over the power to make technical capability notices under the Investigatory Powers Act. According to the judgment, the Home Office argued that revealing the existence of the claim, as well as the names of the parties involved, would be damaging to national security. 'We do not accept that the revelation of the bare details of the case would be damaging to the public interest or prejudicial to national security,' said the judges. The Guardian and other media organisations have reported that the Home Office has served Apple with a technical capability notice (TCN), in which the government demanded access to Apple's Advanced Data Protection service, which heavily encrypts personal data stored remotely in its servers. Apple has pulled ADP from the UK rather than comply with the notice, saying it would never build a 'backdoor' to its products or services. Singh and Johnson said that neither Apple or the Home Office had confirmed or denied the accuracy of reports around the TCN and its contents. 'This judgment should not be taken as an indication that the media reporting is or is not accurate,' the judges added. The details of the TCN remain unknown. Journalists were not allowed into a hearing last month related to the case. Multiple media organisations, including the Guardian, the Financial Times, the BBC and the PA news agency, asked the tribunal to confirm who was taking part in the hearing on 14 March and for it to sit in public. Neither journalists nor legal representatives on behalf of the media were allowed into the hearing, and the identities of the parties involved were not disclosed head of the hearing. The judges added that it could be possible for 'some or all future hearings to incorporate a public element, with or without reporting restrictions' but that could not be ruled on at this stage in the process. Recipients of a TCN cannot reveal the existence of an order unless they are given permission from the home secretary. The tribunal's website states that hearings should be closed to the public only when 'strictly necessary', but its rules declare there must be no disclosure of information that is 'prejudicial to national security'. Ross McKenzie, a data protection partner at the law firm Addleshaw Goddard, said despite the ruling it was 'highly unlikely' there would be any in-depth revelations of the Home Office's case for accessing Apple user data. 'We may get a skeletal decision similar to what has been shared so far, which summarises the rationale without any meaningful detail,' said McKenzie.
Yahoo
07-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Home Office loses bid to keep Apple legal challenge private
The Home Office has lost a bid to keep legal action brought by Apple against the Government private. Last month, the Investigatory Powers Tribunal, a specialist tribunal which deals with allegations of unlawful intrusion and some national security matters, sat behind closed doors for an all-day hearing where the identities of the parties involved were not publicly known. Multiple media organisations, including the PA news agency, asked the tribunal to confirm who was taking part in the hearing on March 14 and to sit in public. Neither journalists nor legal representatives on behalf of the media were allowed into the hearing, and the identities of the parties involved were not disclosed. However, in a public judgment on Monday, judges at the tribunal said the case relates to legal action brought against the Home Office by Apple over the power to make technical capability notices under the Investigatory Powers Act 2016. In a nine-page ruling, Lord Justice Singh and Mr Justice Johnson said that 'bare details', including the identities of the parties, could be made public after a request from the Home Office that they remain private. Lawyers for the Home Office told the hearing in March that it would be damaging to national security if the fact of the claim, or details, were published, the judges said. They continued: 'We do not accept that the revelation of the bare details of the case would be damaging to the public interest or prejudicial to national security.' Lord Justice Singh and Mr Justice Johnson later said it could be possible 'for some or all future hearings to incorporate a public element, with or without reporting restrictions' but that could not be decided at this stage. It was previously reported that Apple was bringing legal action over the UK Government's request to access data covered by Apple's Advanced Data Protection (ADP). The ADP is an opt-in tool on Apple's iCloud service which meant only an account holder could access the 'majority' of file types such as photos or notes, as they were end-to-end encrypted – meaning even Apple cannot access them. The Government issued an order under the Investigatory Powers Act 2016, asking for the ability to access this data from Apple users, according to reports. The iPhone maker subsequently said that it was withdrawing the tool from use in the UK, turning it off as an option for those not already using it, and will introduce a process to move existing users away from it. Lord Justice Singh and Mr Justice Johnson said that neither Apple or the Home Office had confirmed or denied that these reports were accurate. 'This judgment should not be taken as an indication that the media reporting is or is not accurate,' the judges added. Following the ruling, a Home Office spokesperson said: 'We do not comment on legal proceedings. Nor do we comment on operational matters, including confirming or denying the existence of individual notices. 'The Government's first priority is to keep people safe. There are longstanding and targeted investigatory powers that allow the authorities to investigate terrorists, paedophiles and the most serious criminals and they are subject to robust safeguards including judicial authorisations and oversight to protect people's privacy. 'Those powers have saved lives, prevented incredibly serious terrorist plots against the UK, and put dangerous criminals behind bars. 'We have made clear that those targeted investigatory powers alongside strong judicial safeguards must be sustained as technology changes, as they continue to be essential to keeping our country safe. 'Technology companies need be able to innovate and improve security, but unilateral moves which prevent investigations into terrorism or serious child abuse put public safety at grave risk. These powers are purely about preventing serious crime and pursuing criminals, and do not affect our commitment to free speech. 'The Investigatory Powers Act and Technical Capability Notices allow the UK to maintain existing and long standing counter-terrorism and serious crime investigative capabilities in the face of fast changing technology, especially when we know that terrorists and child abusers organise and seek to hide evidence of their crimes online. 'TCNs themselves do not directly provide access to data – relevant targeted warrants and authorisations must also be in place. Nor do TCNs extend powers to obtain access to data; their purpose is to ensure that those existing powers can continue to be exercised effectively. 'The Government believes both in protecting privacy and in ensuring that the most serious crimes and terror threats can be investigated or stopped. Let us be clear: any suggestion that this is a binary choice between public safety and privacy is incorrect. We can, and must, have both. '
Yahoo
13-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Yvette Cooper accused of undermining UK-US special relationship in Apple spying row
US politicians have said the special relationship is being undermined by a 'cloak of secrecy' around Yvette Cooper's order that Apple install an iPhone back door. Five members of Congress have written to Lord Justice Singh, the president of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT), urging British officials to lift a gagging order ahead of Apple challenging the order. On Friday, Apple will appeal against a technical capability notice issued by the Home Secretary demanding the company break the advanced data protection (ADP) feature that encrypts iPhone backups. The IPT hearing is scheduled to be held in secret, and the tribunal has not acknowledged that it relates to Apple. Disclosing back-door orders is illegal under UK surveillance laws. The existence of the Home Office order and Apple's appeal has only emerged through media reports and the company's own decision to remove ADP for British users. The letter, signed by Democrat senators Ron Wyden and Alex Padilla along with House of Representatives members Zoe Lofgren, a Democrat, and Republicans Andy Biggs and Warren Davidson, urges the judge to 'apply the principles of open justice' to Friday's hearing. 'We write to request the IPT remove the cloak of secrecy related to notices given to American technology companies by the United Kingdom, which infringes on free speech and privacy, undermines important United States Congress and UK parliamentary oversight, harms national security, and ultimately, undermines the special relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom,' it reads. 'The existence of the technical capabilities notice has been widely reported and commented on, making any argument for a closed hearing on this very existence unsustainable.' The letter said Britain was 'violating the free speech rights of US companies' by preventing them from disclosing the existence of back-door orders. 'The UK's attempted gag has already restricted US companies from engaging in speech that is constitutionally protected under US law,' it said. 'We urge you to permit US companies to discuss the technical demands they have received from the UK under the Investigatory Powers Act with Congress' Ms Cooper's order, issued in January, has led to escalating criticism from US politicians. Donald Trump has compared the order to 'something that you hear about with China'. His national intelligence director Tulsi Gabbard has called the order 'egregious' and vowed to investigate whether it is legal under US-UK data treaties. Apple's ADP feature, introduced in 2022, allows users to protect iPhone backups such as messages and photos with end-to-end encryption, meaning the company and security services are unable to access it. Users must opt in to the feature. The tech giant blocked users from activating the feature last month, saying it was 'gravely disappointed' at the situation. However, this does not free the company from the order, which can apply to overseas users. The Home Office has refused to comment on the existence of the order, but Dan Jarvis, the security minister, has told MPs that it can only use surveillance powers on an 'exceptional basis, and only when it is necessary and proportionate to do so'. Civil liberties groups Big Brother Watch, Index on Censorship, and Open Rights Group have also written to the tribunal urging them to hold the hearing in public. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Telegraph
13-03-2025
- Business
- Telegraph
Yvette Cooper accused of undermining UK-US special relationship in Apple spying row
US politicians have said the special relationship is being undermined by a 'cloak of secrecy' around Yvette Cooper's order that Apple install an iPhone back door. Five members of Congress have written to Lord Justice Singh, the president of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT), urging British officials to lift a gagging order ahead of Apple challenging the order. On Friday, Apple will appeal against a technical capability notice issued by the Home Secretary demanding the company break the advanced data protection (ADP) feature that encrypts iPhone backups. The IPT hearing is scheduled to be held in secret, and the tribunal has not acknowledged that it relates to Apple. Disclosing back-door orders is illegal under UK surveillance laws. The existence of the Home Office order and Apple's appeal has only emerged through media reports and the company's own decision to remove ADP for British users. The letter, signed by Democrat senators Ron Wyden and Alex Padilla along with House of Representatives members Zoe Lofgren, a Democrat, and Republicans Andy Biggs and Warren Davidson, urges the judge to 'apply the principles of open justice' to Friday's hearing. 'Infringes on free speech' 'We write to request the IPT remove the cloak of secrecy related to notices given to American technology companies by the United Kingdom, which infringes on free speech and privacy, undermines important United States Congress and UK parliamentary oversight, harms national security, and ultimately, undermines the special relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom,' it reads. 'The existence of the technical capabilities notice has been widely reported and commented on, making any argument for a closed hearing on this very existence unsustainable.' The letter said Britain was 'violating the free speech rights of US companies' by preventing them from disclosing the existence of back-door orders. 'The UK's attempted gag has already restricted US companies from engaging in speech that is constitutionally protected under US law,' it said. 'We urge you to permit US companies to discuss the technical demands they have received from the UK under the Investigatory Powers Act with Congress' Ms Cooper 's order, issued in January, has led to escalating criticism from US politicians. Donald Trump has compared the order to 'something that you hear about with China'. His national intelligence director Tulsi Gabbard has called the order 'egregious' and vowed to investigate whether it is legal under US-UK data treaties. 'Gravely disappointed' Apple's ADP feature, introduced in 2022, allows users to protect iPhone backups such as messages and photos with end-to-end encryption, meaning the company and security services are unable to access it. Users must opt in to the feature. The tech giant blocked users from activating the feature last month, saying it was 'gravely disappointed' at the situation. However, this does not free the company from the order, which can apply to overseas users. The Home Office has refused to comment on the existence of the order, but Dan Jarvis, the security minister, has told MPs that it can only use surveillance powers on an 'exceptional basis, and only when it is necessary and proportionate to do so'. Civil liberties groups Big Brother Watch, Index on Censorship, and Open Rights Group have also written to the tribunal urging them to hold the hearing in public.
Yahoo
13-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Pressure grows to hold secret Apple data privacy hearing in public
US politicians, civil rights campaigners and the BBC are all calling for a High Court hearing about a data privacy row between Apple and the UK government to be held in public. The tech giant is taking legal action after the Home Office demanded the right to access customer data protected by its Advanced Data Protection (ADP) programme. Apple cannot access data stored in this way currently - but the UK government says it needs to be able to see it if there is a national security risk. The BBC understands the matter will be considered at a closed hearing of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal at the High Court on Friday morning. In an open letter, five US politicians from across the political divide have urged the Tribunal to remove what they call the "cloak of secrecy" surrounding the row - which they say has major security implications. The letter has been signed by Senators Ron Wyden and Alex Padilla, and Members of Congress Warren Davidson, Andy Biggs and Zoe Lofgren. "It is imperative that the UK's technical demands of Apple - and of any other US companies - be subjected to robust, public analysis and debate," they said. The BBC has contacted Apple for a response. The Home Office declined to comment. Separately, a group of civil liberties organisations has also written to the Tribunal president, Lord Justice Singh. Big Brother Watch, Index on Censorship, and Open Rights Group argue there is "significant public interest" in "on what basis the UK government believes it can compel a private company to undermine the privacy and security of its customers". "Holding this Tribunal in secret would be an affront to the global privacy and security issues that are being discussed," Open Rights Group Executive Director Jim Killock told the BBC. "This is bigger than just the UK or Apple." The BBC is also asking the Tribunal for the hearing to be in public so it can report what is said by the parties present. ADP is contentious because it is end to end encrypted, meaning no-one can access files that have been secured with it apart from their owner. In February, it emerged the UK government was seeking the right to be able to access data protected in this way using powers granted to it under the Investigatory Powers Act. The Act allows it to covertly compel firms to provide information to law enforcement agencies. Apple responded by pulling ADP in the UK and then launching legal action to challenge the government's demand. It is understood the matter will come before Lord Justice Singh on Friday. Because it relates to the security services, it is scheduled to be held in private. In an earlier statement, Apple said: "Enhancing the security of cloud storage with end to end encryption is more urgent than ever before. "Apple remains committed to offering our users the highest level of security for their personal data and are hopeful that we will be able to do so in future in the UK." The Home Office has previously told the BBC: "The UK has a longstanding position of protecting our citizens from the very worst crimes, such as child sex abuse and terrorism, at the same time as protecting people's privacy. "The UK has robust safeguards and independent oversight to protect privacy and privacy is only impacted on an exceptional basis, in relation to the most serious crimes and only when it is necessary and proportionate to do so." What Apple pulling Advanced Data Protection means for you UK demands access to Apple users' encrypted data
