A wave of emergency powers and extreme measures in response to the coronavirus pandemic have brought about the greatest loss of liberty in our country's history. Extraordinary circumstances require extraordinary measures - but not an authoritarian surveillance state. Freedoms are too easily lost in the heat of crises - join us to protect them.
Emergency measures are needed to protect public health. However, they must be proportionate, lawful and strictly temporary way, to protect our democracy in the long run.
That's why we’re producing monthly reports exposing excessive uses of emergency powers with analysis and recommendations. We'll publish them here - and we'll send an Emergency Powers & Civil Liberties Report to every parliamentarian, every month.
Click here for our April report.
Our May report is due on 28 May 2020.
Got a tip? Let us know if the emergency powers are being used excessively or inappropriately in your area. It’s really important that, where possible, you send us evidence such as photos or videos.
The publication of this report marks approximately one month since the Coronavirus Act 2020 was passed into law on 25th March 2020, and since the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) Regulations 2020 were made by statutory instrument on 26th March.
You can read much more about the Health Protection Regulations in our monthly reports.
Here is our briefing for parliament on the Health Protection Regulations.
One month ago, a series of statutory instruments were made under the Public Health Act 1984 to enforce so-called “lockdown” restricons. Decisions of such magnitude require not only legal authority but democrac consent (...)
Extraordinary circumstances require extraordinary measures, but we cannot let basic rights fall casualty to crisis. The Coronavirus Act contains the most draconian powers ever in peace-time Britain, including:
The extraordinary powers in the Coronavirus Bill demand close scrutiny, some require major amendments and signicant limitation, and some — in absence of further justication or explanation — should simply be removed.
In this page, we set out the big questions about the new NHSX contact tracing app and explain what we know so far.
We think the Health Secretary’s choice of a state-controlled, centralised app is wrong and leaves lots of unanswered questions. Our director explains some of the reasons here.
In 2-3 weeks time, we’ll all be faced with the choice of whether to download and use the app or not. It’s a personal choice and there is no right or wrong answer. Here we try to give you the information you need, in as simple terms as possible, to help you make an informed choice.
If you have any further questions or want to share your thoughts or contributions on this set of questions, email us at firstname.lastname@example.org
As an organisation that defends freedom of expression, we're concerned that tech companies are limiting free speech on their platforms at this moment of international crisis, in ways that are not proportional or time limited.
Read our letters below: