The UK government has been unsuccessful in its efforts to keep details of a legal dispute with Apple hidden from public view.
On Monday, the investigatory powers tribunal, which examines potential unlawful actions by domestic intelligence services, denied the Home Office’s request to conceal even the “bare details” of the case from public knowledge.
A ruling issued by Lord Justice Singh, president of the tribunal, and Mr Justice Johnson revealed some information about the case for the first time. They confirmed that Apple has brought a legal challenge against the Home Office regarding the power to issue technical capability notices under the Investigatory Powers Act.
According to the judgment, the Home Office contended that disclosing the existence of the claim and the identities of parties involved would harm national security.
“We do not accept that the revelation of the bare details of the case would be damaging to the public interest or prejudicial to national security,” the judges stated.
Media outlets have previously reported that the Home Office served Apple with a technical capability notice (TCN), demanding access to Apple’s Advanced Data Protection service, which provides strong encryption for personal data stored on its remote servers.
Apple has withdrawn ADP from the UK rather than comply with the notice, maintaining that it would never create a “backdoor” to its products or services.
The judges noted that neither Apple nor the Home Office had confirmed or denied the accuracy of media reports about the TCN and its contents, adding: “This judgment should not be taken as an indication that the media reporting is or is not accurate.” The specific details of the TCN remain undisclosed.
Media representatives were barred from attending a hearing related to the case last month. Several news organizations, including major British media outlets, requested confirmation of who was participating in the March 14 hearing and asked for it to be held publicly.
The judges indicated that “some or all future hearings” might include “a public element, with or without reporting restrictions,” though they couldn’t make a determination at this stage.
TCN recipients are prohibited from revealing an order’s existence without permission from the home secretary. The tribunal’s website indicates hearings should only be closed to the public when “strictly necessary,” though its rules prohibit disclosure of information “prejudicial to national security.”
Ross McKenzie, a data protection partner at Addleshaw Goddard law firm, said despite the ruling, it remained “highly unlikely” that any in-depth revelations about the Home Office’s case for accessing Apple user data would emerge.
“We may get a skeletal decision similar to what has been shared so far, which summarises the rationale without any meaningful detail,” McKenzie said.
A Home Office spokesperson declined to comment on legal proceedings but added that “longstanding and targeted investigatory powers” had “saved lives, prevented incredibly serious terrorist plots against the UK, and put dangerous criminals behind bars.” The spokesperson emphasized these powers needed to be maintained as technology evolved.
For more political updates, visit London Pulse News.
