Critics of lockdown policies are outraged by a decision from the Covid Inquiry, which excluded evidence of state surveillance targeting academics, journalists, and human rights activists from its final report. Silkie Carlo, director of Big Brother Watch, submitted a detailed statement following an official Rule 9 request, yet it was omitted from the published report and went unmentioned in the investigation's findings.
During the pandemic, the Counter Disinformation Unit (CDU) systematically recorded legitimate speech from individuals who were critical of government policies. In her statement, Carlo described how CDU reports were used to monitor critics rather than simply countering misinformation. The government spent significant sums on contracts with Logically AI, a company that helped track and flag social media posts. According to Big Brother Watch, the AI firm received over £1 million for this work.
The inquiry concluded that the CDU's activities were "lawful, necessary, and proportionate." However, Carlo described this verdict as an illusion of accountability. What initially seemed like a move toward transparency—the request for her testimony—turned into the suppression of inconvenient evidence. She noted that the CDU flagged not only falsehoods but also truthful, lawful speech of democratic importance.
An Inquiry spokesperson explained that the body is not obligated to publish every statement it receives, but only those the chair considers sufficiently relevant to the proceedings. When Carlo questioned why her document had not been released, she was told it was an "administrative error" and promised it would be published soon. The government emphasized that the CDU worked only with public information and did not track specific individuals.
In her statement, Carlo specifically highlighted the scale of the monitoring, noting that the CDU recorded accurate, well-founded criticisms of key issues, not just alleged "disinformation." This included discussions on the harm lockdowns caused to children and critiques of vaccination policy. While many of these concerns were later proven correct, they were omitted from the final report’s public narrative, which overlooked the evidence provided by Big Brother Watch.
The critics being monitored were prominent scientists and public figures. Among them were epidemiologist Carl Heneghan, Alexandre de Figueiredo of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, and Molly Kingsley, who led the campaign to reopen schools. Even former Conservative minister David Davis was monitored by the CDU after he published a critique of early lockdown models in the Telegraph.
As a result, one of the key documents requested by the Inquiry itself was left out of public discussion, despite the fact that the investigation gathered over 600,000 pieces of evidence. Carlo believes this provides an incomplete picture of events and prevents the public from understanding the full extent of state surveillance during the pandemic. The publication of all requested witness statements—regardless of whether they appear in the main report—is vital to avoid a cherry-picked version of the facts and ensure the true accountability of democratic institutions.
