Someone's encrypted files should be regarded to be in the same category as material they memorized in their brain. Off limits.
Find some other way to get evidence about their wrongdoing to convict them.
That's very clearly not what I wrote. You can demand information this way, not a confession... People in the UK generally have a legal obligation to answer any questions the court has, unless they are themselves the accused. There are a small few other exceptions.
Just because UK law allows compelled disclosure doesn’t make it right—it makes it a bad law. It creates a self-incrimination loophole, shifting the burden of proof onto individuals instead of the state. Leading to erosion of due process and a presumption of guilt, forcing people to either comply or face punishment, even when no crime has been proven. Civil rights advocates have lambasted this law.
So I ask: Do you believe it to be balanced?
Using flawed laws to justify more erosion of privacy only deepens the problem.