Charged for failing to comply with a Section 49 Notice (RIPA Part 3)

[David Hansen]

On 22 May 2008 at 16:47, Nicholas Bohm wrote:

> I haven't looked at this point, but in any case if the notice was given 
> after the relevant date, it presumably applies to a key in the 
> possession of the recipient of the notice immediately before it was given.

I think that is a legal argument:-) It seems that those inside the tent 
have, as usual, twisted things to suit themselves. They claim that this 
is not retrospective, but it sure looks retrospective to me no matter 
how many debating points are advanced to claim otherwise.

Of course sooner or later this law will be challenged as it is illegal 
under the human rights laws people from the UK played a large part in 
drawing up. I hope that when that happens the courts do the right thing 
and strike it down. The police can have my keys from my cold dead 
hands.

If it wasn't so serious it would be mildly amusing. The police tell 
people that they don't have to say anything. The police then tell the 
same person that they have to say what their passphrase is, with 
menaces. Alice in Wonderland.


-- 
  David Hansen, Edinburgh 
 I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents 
me   
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54