The Evolution Of Elucidation: The Snowden Cases Before The Investigatory Powers Tribunal

2Citations
Citations of this article
10Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

In 2018 the European Court of Human Rights found that the UK's Investigatory Powers Tribunal is an ‘effective remedy’ when it comes to reviewing the compatibility of the UK's domestic legal framework governing the interception of communication and other communications surveillance powers with the requirements of the European Convention on Human Rights. In particular, the Court praised the Tribunal's ‘elucidatory function’, which it performed during a series of cases that arose in the aftermath of Edward Snowden's disclosures in 2013. This article analyses and historicises the elucidatory function by comparing it with previous cases where the High Court and the IPT resolved questions of law arising from similar problems. Using insights derived from systems theory, the article argues that the elucidatory function evolved as a containment measure in response to unexpected crises of control over classified information. The procedure resolves conflicts between secrecy, security, and the publicity required by the law itself.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Keenan, B. (2022). The Evolution Of Elucidation: The Snowden Cases Before The Investigatory Powers Tribunal. Modern Law Review, 85(4), 906–937. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12713

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free