I'm curious about the careful wording they used: this is carefully referring to data gathered by Americans[1] and used by GCHQ, and not to data gathered by GCHQ.
I understand that GCHQ, while not admitting to the existence of TEMPORA in public, is being careful with it, providing in-house lawyers for their staff to operate within what they think the law says.
So this ruling only changes the "We spy on your citizens; you spy on ours" work-around to various laws making it hard to spy on your own citizens. Since the English laws are pretty clear and should be easy enough for GCHQ to work with it's not much change on our side.
Comments
I'm curious about the careful wording they used: this is carefully referring to data gathered by Americans[1] and used by GCHQ, and not to data gathered by GCHQ.
I understand that GCHQ, while not admitting to the existence of TEMPORA in public, is being careful with it, providing in-house lawyers for their staff to operate within what they think the law says.
So this ruling only changes the "We spy on your citizens; you spy on ours" work-around to various laws making it hard to spy on your own citizens. Since the English laws are pretty clear and should be easy enough for GCHQ to work with it's not much change on our side.