Together for Justice expresses deep concern over the evidence presented before UK courts revealing Bahrain’s involvement in digital surveillance operations targeting political dissidents residing in London. The information disclosed in these proceedings shows that Bahrain deployed advanced intrusion tools to infiltrate activists’ devices and monitor their private lives—an egregious violation of their fundamental rights and a direct attack on the legal sovereignty of the United Kingdom. This conduct demonstrates the extent to which authoritarian regimes are willing to extend their repressive apparatus beyond their borders without hesitation or restraint.
The case files submitted to the British judiciary confirm that Bahrain used the German-made spyware “FinFisher,” commercially known as “FinSpy,” one of the most intrusive surveillance tools ever developed. The software is capable of logging every keystroke, copying messages, chats, images, and files, monitoring emails and browsing histories, and even activating microphones and cameras without the user’s knowledge. In practice, it transforms the entire digital life of the victim into a surveillance space fully controlled by the operator. The two primary victims in this case—prominent Bahraini opposition figure Dr. Saeed Shehabi and activist Moosa Mohammed—were both living in London when their devices were infected in September 2011, according to digital forensic experts who testified before the UK courts.
What is unfolding before the British judiciary is not a political dispute or a diplomatic misunderstanding but a deliberate hostile act targeting individuals who live under the protection of British law. The fact that Bahrain conducted such operations inside a country that prides itself on safeguarding rights and freedoms raises a fundamental question about the environment that emboldens authoritarian regimes to behave as though they are above the law. Such regimes do not engage in cross-border surveillance unless they believe they enjoy unofficial immunity, political backing, or willful blindness from certain Western governments willing to overlook abuses in exchange for economic or security partnerships.
The UK Supreme Court now faces a critical test that goes far beyond the details of this particular case. The issue at stake is Britain’s ability to protect its territory from external repression and uphold its moral and legal obligations toward political refugees who seek safety within its borders. Should this trial fail to send a clear message that digital repression is not tolerated, it would open the door for other regimes to replicate the same violations, exploiting Western hesitation to challenge politically connected allies.
Together for Justice views the escalation of this case to the UK’s highest court as evidence of the serious harm inflicted on the victims and a clear indication that the surveillance operation was not a technical glitch but a calculated act of transnational intimidation. The psychological and social impact on the victims is profound, yet the Bahraini regime continues to hide behind claims of sovereign immunity to avoid accountability—reflecting the mindset of regimes that silence dissent at home and pursue critics wherever they flee.
In light of these developments, the central question remains: Will this trial become yet another procedural formality filed away in the archives, or will it mark a turning point proving that British law can rise above political and economic influence to deliver justice, regardless of who stands accused? The answer will determine not only the outcome of this case but also the credibility of the UK’s legal system in confronting transnational repression.
Together for Justice affirms that protecting dissidents and political refugees in the United Kingdom is not a diplomatic preference but a legal and moral obligation. The organization urges the British authorities to take a firm, unequivocal position that rejects the transformation of UK territory into a playground for authoritarian regimes exporting their repression abroad. Addressing these violations is the first essential step toward safeguarding victims, preventing future abuses, and proving that the rule of law in a democratic state like the UK is not an empty slogan but a genuine and enforceable commitment.