Government surveillance powers deemed 'undemocratic and unnecessary' in senior lawyer's report

But government should still be allowed to collect bulk data to protect citizens, says David Anderson QC

UK government agencies and intelligence services should be allowed to continue the bulk collection of citizens' data, but use of "intrusive power" must be demonstrated to be absolutely necessary and democratic, a new report on British data laws has concluded.

The newly published 370-page document, titled A Question of Trust, was compiled by David Anderson QC, an independent reviewer of terrorism legislation.

The release of the report comes shortly after surveillance whistle-blower Edward Snowden accused the British government of trying to limit its citizens' civil liberties by secretly passing legislation that allows GCHQ to "hack anybody's computer."

Introducing his report, Anderson - who is keen to stress his independence from government - said the government needs the ability to mass collect data in order to protect citizens from crimes.

"Modern communications networks can be used by the unscrupulous for purposes ranging from cyberattack, terrorism and espionage to fraud, kidnap and child sexual exploitation. A successful response to these threats depends on entrusting public bodies with the powers they need to identify and follow suspects in a borderless online world," he wrote.

However, Anderson states that as much as be believes government surveillance powers to be necessary, the authorities must be able to demonstrate the collection of data is justifiable.

"Trust requires verification. Each intrusive power must be shown to be necessary, clearly spelled out in law, limited in accordance with human rights standards and subject to demanding and visible safeguards," he said.

Anderson also argued that current surveillance laws are too fragmented and that a proper framework needs to be set out in order to create a coherent list of what is acceptable when it comes to government surveillance.

"The current law is fragmented, obscure, under constant challenge and variable in the protections that it affords the innocent. It is time for a clean slate. This report aims to help parliament achieve a world-class framework for the regulation of these strong and vital powers," said Anderson, who also argued that legislation such as the Regulation of Investigator Powers act (RIPA) has become obsolete.

"RIPA, obscure since its inception, has been patched up so many times as to make it incomprehensible to all but a tiny band of initiates. A multitude of alternative powers, some of them without statutory safeguards, confuse the picture further. This state of affairs is undemocratic, unnecessary and - in the long run - intolerable," he wrote.

Addressing the House of Commons, home secretary Theresa May said Anderson's report will be among a number of documents consulted in the drafting of legislation on surveillance before the end of 2016.

The government has already outlined proposals in the Investigatory Powers Bill for new legislation designed to give the authorities extended powers to "target the online communications" of suspects via bulk collection of personal data.

However, privacy campaigners are concerned about the proposed legislation, which builds on plans originally outlined in the Communications Data Act - dubbed the Snooper's Charter by critics who say the legislation represents a massive breach of individual freedoms.

Privacy campaign group Big Brother Watch has welcomed certain aspects of the report, but argues that it does not go far enough in calling for restrictions on government surveillance powers.

"While the report features a number of excellent recommendations, notably the introduction of judicial authorisation of warrants; including those currently signed off by a secretary of state, the creation of a new Commissioner system, a complete rewrite of RIPA, and that a compelling case for the intrusive powers called for in the Snooper's Charter has failed to be made," said Renate Samson, chief executive of Big Brother Watch.

"On the issue of bulk data collection, further discussion about safeguards based on necessity and proportionality is critical. While useful, bulk data collection has the power, as Mr Anderson noted, to be "revealing of personal habits and characteristics". Further discussion and debate is therefore essential, she continued.

"We hope today's report will be the start of a long-overdue and much-needed parliamentary and public debate. The creation of a joint committee to begin analysis on existing legislation and Mr Anderson's report should now be convened," Samson added.