Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
Just in case you missed the point, in amongst Perry's legal arguments, let's say it loud again: WE DID NOT CONSENT #SpyCopspic.twitter.com/sfyneQP00r
In summary the @metpoliceuk case seems to be that sexist discrimination by #spycops is not important and the Tribunal should decline to make a ruling on. Perry makes it clear that if the Tribunal does decide to make a ruling, he has no justification to offer for why it took place
Perry now addressing concepts of "Necessary and Proportionate" - He thinks the key point is that there are various "legitimate purposes" for deploying these powers set out under RIPA. Of course these rules changed in 2013 because of the horrifying revelations about #spycops abuse
Perry says the question is: Is there a law regulating #spycops?
Does it provide adequate information about the circumstances in which public authorities are likely to use these powers? and does it indicate the scope of the discretion they are given to do that?
He says all of these materials did exist and were "readily accessible" and the law provided indication as to the conditions in which public authorities might deploy #spcyops, as well as regulations on granting and renewal of authorisations.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
