2nd case today

[Pete Chown]

Donald Ramsbottom wrote:

> This one is on privacy and the Inland Revenue and the EHCR/HR, guess who
> won. Do not read if law offends you.

This case sounds to me as though it is correctly decided: just about
all democracies have provision for requiring the disclosure of
documents.  (Provisions for requiring the decryption of documents that
happen to be encrypted are a separate issue.)

Do you think that the documents would have been exempt from disclosure
if they would have incriminated the people in possession of them?
That seemed to be the thrust of the case about the Guardian and the
special procedure material.  (Or at least that the court would have to
take into consideration the issues surrounding self-incrimination.)

-- 
Pete