Privacy International defends the right to privacy across the world, and fights surveillance and other intrusions into private life by governments and corporations. Read more »


Stream: In the media

If your media organisation requires information or comment from Privacy International, please get in touch with comms@privacy.org / +44 (0) 20 7242 2836.

In the media
Publisher: 
Democratic Audit Uk
Publication date: 
14-Jan-2014
Original story link: 

Caroline Wilson Palow, Legal Officer, Privacy International said:

"Despite recent attempts by the UK Government to reform the Intelligence and Security Committee through the Justice and Security Act 2013, the continuing Snowden revelations show how feeble UK oversight actually is. It is now widely acknowledged that the ISC’s weaknesses have resulted in an almost ‘siloed’ body with little transference of knowledge or expertise from a core group of representatives to the wider Parliament, much less the public. This in turn leads to a severe lack of accountability, transparency, and ultimately a breakdown in trust – both of the oversight mechanism and of the agencies themselves. But it does not have to be this way.

The ISC’s unwavering defence of the intelligence agencies’ actions is in contrast to the reaction of the similar bodies in the US. While far from perfect, the US response to the Snowden revelations has resulted in a more robust debate about the powers of the intelligence services than we have thus far seen in the UK. Congress and the US courts have placed significant pressure on the US executive and intelligence services to acknowledge the Snowden revelations and reveal additional details regarding the decision-making process that led to such potential abuses of power. That pressure has resulted in much more transparency, which in turn has led to substantive discussions regarding reform. The ISC should take notes."

Countries: 
In the media
Publisher: 
Pink News
Publication date: 
09-Jan-2014
Original story link: 

Mike Rispoli, Communications Manager of Privacy International told PinkNews: ”Just because it is information that can be accessed, it is unjustifiable for this company to collect and share information without my consent. People make choices every day about what they share, to whom, and on what platforms. On one site, I may share my sexual orientation, but not my political beliefs. On another, maybe I’ll share the school I attended but not my home address. In the end, its about our choice and agency over what information we give out. Companies like NameTag that want to aggregate all this information and combine it with deeply-invasive technology like facial recognition software without our permission completely expose all of us to any stranger on the street.”

In the media
Publisher: 
Wired UK
Publication date: 
09-Jan-2014
Author(s): 
Liat Clark
Original story link: 

"Every country owes the same obligation to each individual whose communications pass through their territory: not to interfere with those communications, subject to permissible limitations established by law," Privacy International commented in a separate statement. "People who have had their communications intercepted, no matter their location or nationality, should be able to object to that interference in the courts and tribunals of the country that carried out the interception."

In the media
Publisher: 
GigaOm
Publication date: 
09-Jan-2014
Author(s): 
David Meyer
Original story link: 

Privacy International Legal Office Caroline Wilson Palow offered this by way of comment:  “It is clear that mass surveillance programs like Tempora have a disproportionate impact on those who live outside the country, since foreigners’ phone calls, emails, or internet searches currently receive even fewer legal protections than the communications of those who reside in the UK. It is wrong and we argue illegal for the UK to discriminate without any reasonable basis between UK and non-UK nationals when spying on their communications.

In the media
Publisher: 
Danish Broadcasting Corporation
Publication date: 
07-Jan-2014
Original story link: 

Privacy International's Edin Omanovic speaks with the Danish Broadcasting Association at Milipol 2013.

In the media
Publisher: 
The Guardian
Publication date: 
19-Dec-2013
Author(s): 
Alex Hern
Original story link: 

The organisations that have signed up include Oxfam, Privacy International and the Open Rights Group, and the individuals include Satbir Singh of the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative and Indian social activist Aruna Roy.

In the media
Publisher: 
South China Morning Post
Publication date: 
19-Dec-2013
Author(s): 
Bien Perez
Original story link: 

The other signatories to the letter to the OGP, included: Privacy International, the Global Network Initiative, Oxfam International, the Centre for Law and Democracy, Indian political and social activist Aruna Roy, former journalist and Global Voices Online founder Rebecca MacKinnon, and Hong Kong In-Media.

In the media
Publisher: 
TechWeek Europe
Publication date: 
10-Dec-2013
Author(s): 
Tom Brewster
Original story link: 

Privacy International was cautious about the impact of the decision in Vienna, but was convinced this would make an impact on companies such as Britain’s Gamma International, which produces the FinFisher spying tool, and Italy’s Hacking Team, which offers competing technology.

Both have faced criticism after their code was uncovered in nations with poor human rights records.

“For the first time, intrusion technology such as those that Finfisher and Hacking Team sell will be explicitly and directly controlled for what that are – surveillance technologies,” Eric King, head researcher at Privacy International, told TechWeekEurope.

In the media
Publisher: 
The Canberra Times
Publication date: 
06-Dec-2013
Author(s): 
Philip Dorling
Original story link: 

Research by Privacy International, an independent watchdog group focused on the proliferation of surveillance technology, has found more than 338 companies offering a total of 97 different technologies worldwide.

Selling such equipment is perfectly legal and these companies say the new technologies are part of the fabric of modern IT systems and help governments defeat terrorism and crime.

But human rights and privacy campaigners are concerned that oppressive regimes can use such technology to clamp down on critics and democracy advocates.

In the media
Publisher: 
Delimiter
Publication date: 
04-Dec-2013
Author(s): 
Renai LeMay
Original story link: 

Global privacy organisation Privacy International has filed a formal complaint with Australia’s Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security over a report that the Australian Signals Directorate had offered to hand over data on Australian citizens to foreign intelligence agencies.

Countries: 

Pages