Police retention of protestor's data is lawful

The police did not break the law in retaining the details of a 91-year-old World War Two veteran and peace campaigner on a secret database, the Supreme Court has ruled.

Following the judgment, John Catt has vowed to take his fight to have his details removed from the police database to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).

Led by Lord Sumption, the court ruled that the state's systematic collection and storage of information about an individual breaches their rights to privacy under article 8(1) of the ECHR, and needed to be justified, a finding welcomed by Catt's solicitor, Shamik Dutta of Bhatt Murphy. The court, however, said that in the circumstances of the case, the police's behaviour was proportionate.

Sumption said the interference with Catt's private life was "minor" and the information stored was personal but not intimate or sensitive. The information, he said, related to overt activities and had been gathered and recorded without the use of intrusive procedures. No stigma, he said, is attached to the inclusion on the database, and that the "proper policing purposes" for which such information is used, makes a significant contribution to tackling crimes.

"The longer-term consequences of restricting the availability of this resource to the police would potentially be very serious. It would adversely affect police operations directed against far less benign spirits than Mr Catt," said Sumption.

Despite the ruling, Dutta said that Catt had been vindicated in taking the case as the vast majority of his data has now been deleted.

Catt, who has no criminal history, started the legal action three years ago after he discovered that the police had kept a log with 66 separate entries about his attendance at peaceful protests. They had recorded details of his appearance, his vehicle, demonstrations that he had attended and details about his daughter, who he went to protests with.

Catt is known for making sketches of anti-arms trade protests, including those organised by a group called Smash EDO.

The Metropolitan Police had brought the case challenging the Court of Appeal's ruling in March 2013, which found the gathering and retention of Catt's details had been unlawful.

Commenting, Kevin Blowe, member of civil liberties group the Network for Police Monitoring, said: "This ruling allows the police extraordinary discretion to gather personal information of individuals for purposes that are never fully defined.

"The Supreme Court has accepted that no further justification is apparently required other than investigating the 'links between protest groups' and their 'organisation and leadership'."

Blowe added: "This judgment represents judicial approval for the mass surveillance of UK protest movements."

Catt said: "Four senior judges have found that my rights have been violated unlawfully, whilst four others have disagreed. I cannot agree that the police in this country should be trusted with information about innocent people's lawful political activities.

"In my view, without a new system of rules governing police surveillance, there is too much scope for the police to abuse their powers. I am therefore left with no option but to take this matter to the European Court of Human Rights for the sake of other innocent people whose lawful political activities are being monitored by the state."

Dutta said that Catt has confirmed his intention to take his case to the ECHR for the benefit of others.

Mr Catt has instructed me to seek a ruling from the European court that, by monitoring and retaining information about people's lawful political activities, the UK is violating the privacy rights of its citizens," he said.