The IPT held that the disclosures, together with the statutory framework and the oversight of the ISC and the Commissioner, “sufficiently signposted” to the public the Intelligence Services’ arrangements for receiving, safeguarding, and disclosing information from Prism and/or the Upstream program. Hence, the notification requirement of Article 8 of the ECHR was satisfied
In regard to Article 8’s prohibition of arbitrary interferences of privacy, the IPT determined, on the basis of the disclosures, that the Intelligence Services’ hitherto secret arrangements for obtaining, safeguarding, and disclosing data obtained from the NSA’s Prism and, hypothetically, Upstream programs were, “save only for the wholly exceptional scenario [which had never occurred of a] 1(b) request,” the same as those in RIPA. Id., para. 51. Hence, the issue of whether the sharing of information from the NSA’s Prism and Upstream programs was compatible with Article 8’s prohibition of arbitrary inteferences with privacy resolved into the issue of whether the relevant provision of RIPA, s.8(4), was compatible. As explained in our posts on the Tempora or s. 8(4) of RIPA issue, in ruling against the Complainants in regard to the Tempora issue, the IPT decided that s.8(4) of RIPA did not arbitrarily interfere with privacy.