Quite agree. We've always said they wouldn't like it if we filmed them going about their business, they would soon be shouting about their human rights.
I wouldn't hold your hopes up too much. It's being covert and the lack of permission that makes it illegal.
They will keep filming openly in order to stop hunts hunting fox - that's still legal. Then how long will it take them to get permission for covert filming if they can convince people that a hunt is breaking the law?
The RSPCA get approval for covert surveillance for prosecuting animal cruelty cases (eg dog fights) and either the LACS or RSPCA will get approval for filming hunting if hunts continue to hunt fox.
I have often wondered if people realise that animal cruelty in England is prosecuted with a private prosecution by the RSPCA, funded by the RSPCA, and not by the Crown Prosecution Service.The RSPCA are, in effect, the animal Police in this country. The LACS or the RSPCA could take the same role for hunting.
It does not need the involvement of the Police or the CPS to prosecute. This ruling won't stop the LACS, it will simply force them to more legal and more effective strategies.
'This ruling won't stop the LACS, it will simply force them to more legal and more effective strategies'
That alone would be a massive step forward. Proper application for surveillance with evidence to support grounds, proper storage, continuity and disclosure of unedited material - these can only be good things