Re: Duhfish So when the police break the law, it's called 'being reckless'.
The article does say that they felt the actions were not compatible with human rights law so it is probable that the police did break the law.
The "anti-terrorism" law is itself only valid if it strikes a reasonable balance between the need for security and peoples human rights. It could be argued that by using it to try and catch whistleblowers that balance is no longer there so the action would fall foul of human rights laws either at a national level or at a European level.
I"m not saying unequivically that this is the case I"m just saying that it is possible, or in my view probable, that laws have been broken in one way or another.
