Britain27 July, 20262 min read
UK Supreme Court Rejects Bahrain Immunity in Dissidents’ FinSpy Spyware Lawsuit
This article is an automated aggregation of coverage from news outlets. Our editorials offer in-depth analysis curated by the NewsCord team.
UK Supreme Court rejects Bahrain's sovereign immunity defense, allowing the spyware case to proceed. Two Bahraini dissidents allege FinSpy hacked their laptops in Britain around 2011.
Spyware lawsuit can proceed
The UK Supreme Court dismissed Bahrain’s appeal against a long-running spyware lawsuit brought in Britain by dissidents Saeed Shehabi and Moosa Mohammed, who allege their laptops were infected with FinSpy while they were in the UK. Amnesty International said the ruling “opens new avenues for justice” by establishing that “the remote infection of devices from abroad constitutes an ‘act in the UK’”.
The case stems from the claim that Bahrain’s agents infected their computers in September 2011, and Amnesty International said the Supreme Court’s decision provides “a clear legal pathway to pursue justice in UK courts.” Amnesty International also said the case is expected to return to the High Court where it will proceed to full trial, after Bahrain previously challenged the matter at the High Court and the Court of Appeal.
Narrow majority, dissent
Multiple outlets said the Supreme Court ruled against Bahrain by a narrow 3-2 majority, rejecting Bahrain’s claim of state immunity to block the lawsuit filed by Shehabi and Mohammed in London’s High Court in 2020. Al Jazeera described the ruling as setting a “significant precedent,” confirming that foreign states can be sued in UK courts over remote surveillance of individuals in Britain even when the hacking was directed from abroad.
Devdiscourse said the court found that the alleged surveillance, though initiated abroad, occurred on British soil and fell under a personal injury exception to state immunity under UK law. Devdiscourse also reported that one dissenting judge warned the decision could place Britain in conflict with international law, while the Supreme Court dismissed Bahrain’s appeal on Monday.
Accountability and next steps
In statements carried by Reuters-linked reporting, Moosa Mohammed said, “The era of abusing victims while hiding behind state immunity is over,” and Saeed Shehabi added that “The court's message is clear: states that abuse people on British soil will be held accountable.” Amnesty International framed the ruling as a signal that “tech-enabled transnational repression will no longer be tolerated,” and it said the decision warns that unlawful cross-border invasive surveillance targeting human rights defenders will face legal action.
The Global Banking & Finance Review, quoting Reuters, reported that one dissenting judge said refusing Bahrain’s immunity would “place the United Kingdom in breach of international law.” The case is now expected to return to the High Court, where it will proceed to full trial, after Bahrain’s final appeal was dismissed by the Supreme Court.