Do you have a written citation for that, something from Out-Law.com (or equivalent), or from a qualified solicitor or barrister, which backs up the "I've heard..." up a little?

Not trying to be a hard ass, but I don't think HN benefits from people spreading "legal facts" (c.f. indefinite imprisonment) with an authoritative written tone but without citing legal precedent, or a detailed analysis of the statute in question.

I'm not a lawyer but I imagine if you were taken in front of the same Magistrate's Court or Crown Court, refused to decrypt the _same_ data a second time, were convicted under RIPA, sentenced, you'd have a damn good argument at appeal and it would very likely be quashed. IANAL.

To put more substance behind this opinion, we can look at the Sentencing Council, which when drawing up sentencing guidance, frequently uses the term "fair and proportionate" [1] which is something of a cornerstone remark about how the judiciary should go about dealing with infractions of the law. Reasonable humans would say going to prison twice for the same thing is neither fair, nor proportionate.

[1] https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/news/item/new-sentencin...

I have no substantial evidence to speak of. And I thank you for knocking me off my horse, I was being hasty. Have my upvotes.

Now I checked Wikipedia about those laws, it appears France (my country) has a similar law since 2001. Bummer, I guess.