Migration and Privacy Roundtable - How Privacy and Data Protection Law Can Help Defend Migrants' Rights

Technology and data are increasingly used for immigration enforcement, putting migrants' fate in the hands of systems driven by data processing and algorithms. But privacy and data protection laws exist to defend migrants against abuses of their data and seek redress when their rights are denied based on abusive data processing or algorithmic decision-making.

In this roundtable, co-hosted with Privacy International, we'll hear from immigration law practitioners on how they've used privacy and data protection law to seek information or redress for their clients. From challenging the extraction of data from asylum seekers' mobile phones, or using FOIA legislation and complaints to the ICO to obtain information to gather evidence, to challenging data sharing between police and the Home Office for victims of crime with uncertain immigration status. This session will aim to equip immigration law practitioners and migrants' rights' defenders with tools and avenues to uphold their clients' privacy rights and challenge cases decided on wrongfully processed data.

Speakers:
- Louise Hooper, Garden Court Chambers
- Ollie Persey, Garden Court Chambers
- Adam Straw QC, Doughty Street Chambers
- Dan Carey, Deighton Pierce Glynn
 

Recording

Speaker Profiles

Louise Hooper, Barrister, Garden Court Chambers
Louise Hooper is an established public law, human rights and migration lawyer. Her practice over the last 20 years has involved a focus on human rights, equality and dignity. Whilst waiting to catch a satellite space launch on sabbatical in South America Louise learnt the basics of programming. Her current interests relate to whether or not algorithms can ever be ‘fair’ and the consequences of AI for public and private decision making. Louise spoke on the human rights implications of global deployment of public health technology at the African Legal Network international webinar ‘Data Surveillance Viral Pandemics’ and on the subject of accountability and AI at CogX.

Louise has worked extensively with the Council of Europe as an international expert. This work has involved designing and developing offline and online training on the Istanbul Convention on Combatting Violence against Women and Domestic Violence, conducting baseline country evaluations of compliance with the Istanbul Convention and, most recently writing the guide to ‘Gender based asylum claims and non-refoulement: Articles 60 and 61 of the Istanbul Convention’. She is the appointed international expert to the Drafting committee on Migrant Women of the Gender Equality Commission. 

She co-authored the ICJ’s Practitioner Guide to Refugee Status Claims Based on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (2016) and Butterworths’ Human Trafficking and Modern Slavery: Law and Practice (for criminal practitioners) (1st Edition). She is a contributor and reader for Legal Action Group’s Migrant Support Handbook (forthcoming) and is a regular contributor to MacDonald’s Immigration Law and Practice, previously writing chapters on human rights, deportation, family migration and trafficking, and in the most recent edition the chapter on citizenship.

Ollie Persey, Barrister, Garden Court Chambers
Ollie joined Garden Court Chambers from Public Law Project, where he gained considerable experience in strategic litigation at all domestic levels including the Supreme Court. Ollie has a broad public law practice, specialising in disability and migrant rights and has particular expertise in judicial review claims raising discrimination, education, EU citizens’ rights and retained EU law issues. At Public Law Project, Ollie worked on all aspects of judicial review litigation and is well-placed to advise from the earliest stages of a potential claim. He has in-depth knowledge of the legal aid scheme, with expertise in applying for Exceptional Case Funding (ECF) and challenging Legal Aid Agency funding decisions. Ollie also coordinated Public Law Project’s EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS) support hub, providing second-tier advice to Law Centres and other organisations assisting vulnerable EU citizens and family members to apply to the EUSS. 

He has experience of high-profile Brexit-related judicial reviews, including Miller & Cherry v Prime Minister, in which the Supreme Court held that the prorogation of Parliament was unlawful. Public Law Project’s intervention focused on the importance of Parliamentary scrutiny of Brexit-related statutory instruments. He acts for individuals and NGOs in judicial review claims challenging systemic unfairness. He was recently junior counsel for Project 17 (led by Amanda Weston QC and Bijan Hoshi) in W v Secretary of State for the Home Department, in which the High Court held that part of the No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF) scheme breached Article 3 ECHR. 

Adam Straw QC, Doughty Street Chambers
Adam practices in judicial review, human rights and civil claims against public authorities. He has experience of a wide range of fields, including discrimination, police, prisons, environmental challenges, social welfare, terrorism, children’s rights, immigration and trafficking. He has acted in important recent public law challenges involving the right to life, abortion, deprivation of citizenship, open justice, inquests, assisted suicide, data protection, pensions and welfare benefits.

Adam’s current judicial review cases involving information include a challenge to data sharing between the police and Home Office regarding victims of crime, a challenge brought by Privacy International to bulk data sharing between the UK and international partners, a claim regarding disclosure of health data to an international corporation, and a challenge to a law requiring disclosure of criminal records data about children for certain jobs. He has acted for claimants in a range of previous claims, going back to R (F) v Secretary of State for Justice, in which the Supreme Court decided that the legislation requiring certain ex-offenders to register with the police, and the consequent risk of disclosure of their private data, breached Article 8 ECHR.

Daniel Carey, Partner, Deighton Pierce Glynn
Daniel is an experienced solicitor specialising in human rights, public law and data protection. Daniel has a particular interest in data protection law under the EU General Data Protection Regulation, E-Privacy Directive and public access to information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. His cases often focus on the crossover between data protection and human rights law. He has brought successful public law challenges and civil claims for damages in areas as diverse as the unlawful sharing of asylum seekers’ confidential information with persecuting authorities in the country of origin; the mishandling of information under the UK’s Prevent Guidance; data breaches by public inquiries; inconsistent responses to subject access requests by public authorities; advising a member of parliament on government data practices; successful legal challenges to unlawful state surveillance and data retention legislation; and access to information regarding the UK’s use of armed drones, amongst others.

Daniel also conducts civil claims against corporations in relation to human rights breaches. He has brought cases at all levels of the domestic courts and before the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the EU. Daniel has substantial experience in public law challenges to local and national government. His successful judicial reviews have included police retention of school children’s data under the Prevent counter-extremism programme; opposing library closures in Surrey, Gloucestershire and Somerset; national consultations on changes to legal aid funding, healthcare access for migrants; national legislation governing retention of the public’s telecommunications information; and numerous instances of unlawful immigration detention, failures to provide asylum support housing; failures to recognise victims of human trafficking and delays in asylum decision making for unaccompanied children, victims of human trafficking and others.

Daniel acts in civil claims for damages regarding arbitrary detention including military and immigration detention, torture and rendition. He also acts in claims for damages regarding data breaches and breaches of confidentiality by public authorities and others. His cases have included seeking compensation for unlawful rendition from Iraq to Afghanistan; the unlawful detention of human rights defenders and investigative journalists in fast track immigration detention; the unlawful immigration detention of torture victims and persons with mental health problems; and the protection of former British auxiliaries in Afghanistan.