Low Graphics Site
White bar
.: Latest News :. .: News in Pictures :.
Dawn e-paper
Daily SectionMarker



Misc SectionMarker

Horoscope Recipes Weekly SectionMarker

Weekly SectionMarker



Pakistan's Internet Magazine
Herald

Archive, Search

Weather

FrontPage National International Local Business KSE Forex Sports Editorial Opinion Letters Features Today's Cartoon TV Guide Cowasjee Irfan Hussain Jawed Naqvi Mahir Ali Kamran Shafi The Review Dawn Magazine Young World Images Dawn Group Subscription To Advertise

Previous Story DAWN - the Internet Edition Next Story

July 02, 2008 Wednesday Jamadi-us-Sani 27, 1429



Rights groups win phone tap case against Britain


STRASBOURG (France), July 1: Europe’s top rights court ruled against the British government on Tuesday for intercepting telephone calls between British and Irish rights groups and their clients, violating their right to privacy.

British rights group Liberty and its Irish counterparts British Irish Rights Watch and the Irish Council for Civil Liberties said Britain set up an eavesdropping facility in northwestern England that intercepted much of the telephone, fax and e-mail traffic between Britain and Ireland in the 1990s.

The British Defence Ministry site in Capenhurst, in the county of Cheshire, intercepted all public telecommunications carried by microwave radio between two British Telecom radio stations between 1990 and 1997, the rights groups said.

Much of their communications would have passed through those radio stations and would therefore have been picked up by the Capenhurst Electronic Test Facility, which was designed to intercept 10,000 simultaneous telephone channels, they said.

For security reasons, Britain neither confirmed nor denied the statements made about its surveillance activities, but it agreed that the court could presume some of the civil liberties’ groups communications were intercepted.

“The court recalled that it had previously found that the mere existence of legislation which allowed communications to be monitored secretly had entailed a surveillance threat for all those to whom the legislation might be applied,” the court said in a statement.

“In the applicants’ case, the Court therefore found that there had been an interference with their rights as guaranteed by Article 8,” the court said.—Reuters







Previous Story Top of Page Next Story

RSS Feed

Newsletters

DAWN Logo

News on Mobile

e-paper print replica


The DAWN Media Group

| About Us | Advertising info | Subscription | Feedback | Contributions | Privacy Policy | Help | Contact us |