The rights of notification after surveillance is over: ready for recognition? Presentation given at the conference: Human Rights in the Digital Era, 16th.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Re-use of PSI Data Protection Issues Cécile de Terwangne Professor at the Law Faculty, Research Director at CRIDS University of Namur (Belgium) 2 nd LAPSI.
Advertisements

1 IS THERE A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO FORGET? Bruxelles – 20 May 2009.
Public Voice Symposium "Privacy in a New Era: Challenges, Opportunities and Partnerships" September 13, 2004 Wroclaw, Poland Poland : reducing the gap.
Data Protection & Human Rights. Data Protection: a Human Right Part of Right to Personal Privacy Personal Privacy : necessary in a Democratic Society.
Data Protection Billy Hawkes Data Protection Commissioner Irish Human Rights Commission 20 November 2010.
The data retention directive: data protection aspects Frank Robben General manager Crossroads Bank for Social Security Sint-Pieterssteenweg 375 B-1040.
SOURCES OF EU RIGHTS LAW Article 6 TEU indicates three sources for EE Human rights law. 1) EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, Which was proclaimed in Nice.
MEDIA LAW Copenhagen University Session 9 Dirk VOORHOOF Ghent University (->contact)
Acquisition and loss of citizenship: openings for European courts? Gerard-René de Groot (Maastricht University) Co-financed by the European Fund for the.
Irish Centre for European Law Conference The Law of the Lisbon Treaty.
Eurojust The European Union’s Judicial Cooperation Unit.
Privacy and security: Is Europe going banana? Jean-Marc Van Gyseghem Head of Unit « Liberties in the information society » CRID – University.
Data Protection: International. Data Protection: a Human Right Part of Right to Personal Privacy Personal Privacy : necessary in a Democratic Society.
Data Protection Act Description The Data Protection Act controls how your personal information can be used and protects from the misuse of your.
Data Protection & Human Rights. Data Protection: a Human Right Part of Right to Personal Privacy Personal Privacy : necessary in a Democratic Society.
The Spanish Public Prosecution Service. INDEX 1.Functions Objetive functions: defence of legality Constitutional legality Ordinary.
 The Data Protection Act 1998 is an Act of Parliament which defines UK law on the processing of data on identifiable living people and it is the main.
Copyright / Legal liability Paul Van den Bulck Brussels 28 November 2002 Law of : New Technologies Intellectual.
Confidentiality, Privilege and the Tax Adviser The Impact of European Law Philip Baker QC Paul Farmer.
Legal and constitutional issues related to Information Exchange by Thierry Afschrift Professor Université Libre de Bruxelles Lawyer (Bars of Brussels,
Copyright dilemma: Access right over databases of raw information? Gemma Minero, Lecturer in Law, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid.
Airport noise Case law and the balanced approach Marc Martens 10 December 2007.
The case law of the CJEU in the gambling sector European Economic and Social Committee Hearing 6th September 2011 "On-line gambling - After the Green Paper.
EHRs and the European Union – current legislation and future directions. Dr Richard Fitton.
Tackling IT crime in a global context: the Convention on Cybercrime 3 years after Julio Pérez Gil University of Burgos, Spain.
“Freedom of Media and Data Protection” Workshop within Twinning Project “Implementation of Personal Data Protection Strategy” in Montenegro Hotel Podgorica,
Amicus Legal Consultants THE DEPLOYMENT OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATIVE MEANS IN PROACTIVE ANTI-CORRUPTION INVESTIGATIONS.
Conference for LGBT families in Europe Overview of the work of the Council of Europe in the field of family law Sabrina Cajoly - Council of Europe Directorate.
Whistle-blowing and the Law – Part I Gavin Millar QC and Dr Andrew Scott.
SIS- Schengen Information System The Office for personal data protection.
Data Protection Privacy in the Digital Age: the UN General Assembly Resolution Sophie Kwasny, 16 October th International Conference, Mauritius.
Personal data protection in criminal procedure International collaboration and principle of proportionality LEFIS ROVANIEMI MEETING 19TH 20TH JANUARY 2007.
Still lost in space? Why the Lisbon Treaty does not help to guide individuals in search of an effective enforcement of fundamental rights Agata Capik,
Copyright / Legal liability Paul Van den Bulck Brussels 6 th of june 2003 Law of : New Technologies Intellectual.
The Eighth Asian Bioethics Conference Biotechnology, Culture, and Human Values in Asia and Beyond Confidentiality and Genetic data: Ethical and Legal Rights.
WHOIS data The EU legal principles ICANN - GNSO meeting 2 March 2004 George Papapavlou, European Commission ICANN - GNSO meeting 2 March 2004 George Papapavlou,
20 October 2008Maria Lundberg, NCHR1 JUR 5710 Institutions and Procedures CASE OF SOERING v. THE UNITED KINGDOM (Application no /88) 07 July 1989.
An Overview of International Regulation of Data Protection AFIN- DRI 2002 Lecture Stephen K. Karanja.
Twelve Guiding Principles for the Regulation of Surveillance Camera Systems Presented by: Alastair Thomas Date: 23 rd October 2013.
Data protection and European citizens’ initiatives
Protecting Privacy and Freedom of Communication in the Fight against Cybercrime Southeast Europe Cybersecurity Conference Sofia, Bulgaria 8-9 September.
The EU and Access to Environmental Information Unit D4 European Commission, Directorate General for the Environment 1.
Protecting the safety of journalists Training workshop on media and freedom of expression law.
PRIVACY IN THE ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS SECTOR IN BULGARIA.
1 The balance between access to public information and personal data protection: The German Experience Sven Hermerschmidt, Office of the Federal Commissioner.
European Data Protection Supervisor TAIEX Seminar - Belgrade 9 February 2009 Principles of data protection and international legal framework Alfonso Scirocco.
Brussels Privacy Symposium on Identifiability
Privacy in the Digital Age: the UN General Assembly Resolution
Surveillance around the world
Brussels Privacy Symposium on Identifiability
EU Sanctions on Individuals
THE NEW GENERAL DATA PROTECTION REGULATION: A EUROPEAN OR A GLOBAL STANDARD? Bart van der Sloot Senior Researcher Tilburg Institute for Law, Technology,
Issues of personal data protection in scientific research
Data Protection: EU & International
Athina Antoniou and Lilian Mitrou
Information Governance and Data Privacy: A World of Risk
Data Protection & Human Rights
Introduction to GDPR 09/11/2018.
ECtHR, Hirsi Jamaa and Others v Italy, 27765/09, 23 February 2012
State of the privacy union
ESF Monitoring & Evaluation and Data Protection in Spain
European actions.
Fundamental rights.
Data Protection and Justice and Home Affairs
The activity of Art. 29. Working Party György Halmos
Is Data Protection a Fundamental Right Protecting the Individual?
Procedural and Judicial protection
Checks and balances applied by the ECtHR in cases of mass surveillance
Fundamental rights.
IAPP TRUSTe SYMPOSIUM 9-11 JUNE 2004
Presentation transcript:

The rights of notification after surveillance is over: ready for recognition? Presentation given at the conference: Human Rights in the Digital Era, 16th of September 2011, School of Law, Leeds Paul de Hert, Vrije Universiteit Brussel and Tilburg University & Franziska Boehm, & Franziska Boehm, University of Luxembourg

I. Introduction Surveillance has increased in several ways in recent years:►databases►profiling ►scanning of (tele)communication data Usually for crime fighting purposes

I. Introduction ►One crucial question: Should individuals be informed after they have been subject to surveillance measures? ►No harmonised approach in the EU. ►Belgium and Germany: + ►The Netherlands: +/- ►ECtHR: ~

Overview (I. Introduction) II.The notification duty in EU-law III.CoE and notification, case-law IV.Concluding remarks

II.The notification duty in EU-law ► Article 10 and 11 Directive 95/46. ►Applies to ordinary data processing. ►Not regulated in the FDPJ. ►Coherence in view of the Lisbon Treaty?

III. CoE and notification, 1. ECtHR, first steps ►Klass v. Germany (1978): - No circumvention of the guarantees of Art. 8 ECHR by the fact that the person concerned is kept uninformed of the violation of his rights. - Adequate and effective safeguards against abuse. - One tool = effective remedy in cases of misuse. - The question of notification is therefore linked to the possibility of independent control and effective remedies. - The German Court: “person concerned must be informed after the termination of the surveillance measures as soon as notification can be made without jeopardising the purpose of the restriction”.

III. CoE and notification, 2. Rec. R (87) 15 – the forgotten right? ►Principle 2.2. of Recommendation R (87) 15 (1987) notification of the individual concerned when data about him have been collected and stored without his knowledge, as soon as the object of the police activities is no longer likely to be jeopardised. ►Principle applies in Germany, § 101 (4) Criminal Code part of the ordinary criminal procedure, works in practice since years. Why not in other states/EU? ►No notification at EU-level (Europol, SIS II), not in surveillance cases, not as regards the transfer or entry of data.

III. CoE and notification, 3. ECtHR confirmation of Klass and more protection than Rec. R (87) 15 and Saravia v. Germany (2006): ►Weber and Saravia v. Germany (2006): - Stipulation of important minimum requirements before enacting surveillance measures. - Recognition of the clandestine aspect of surveillance. - Nonetheless, notification is necessary. - Additional protection: only if the data had not been used during their retention period, it was allowed to abstain from the notification duty, ECtHR: +, more protection than princl of Rec. R (87) Plus: independent commission responsible for overseeing the application of the notification.

III. CoE and notification, 4. ECtHR after 2006 ► Ekimdzhiez v. Bulgaria (2007): A clear statement for the notification as an important safeguard against abuse. - - Standard: guarantees in the German cases. - - Notification = safeguards not only during the authorization procedure of surveillance, but also beyond the surveillance activities, in particular when they have ended (Bulgarian: no notification at all, even prohibition of notification). - - Consequences of the Bulgarian law: = Violation of Art. 8 and 13 ECHR

III. CoE and notification, 5. Passive “notification”? ►Kennedy v. the United Kingdom (May 2010): - - No “German” notification system. - But independent and accessible tribunal to review the surveillance measure. - Independent and accessible authority guarantees an effective remedy. - Important is that the individual must have the possibility to obtain information on possible possibility to obtain information on possible surveillance measures ordered against him. surveillance measures ordered against him. - Is the Kennedy case a practical solution?

III. CoE and notification, 6. The use of a Global Positioning System (GPS) Uzun v. Germany (Sept. 2010): ►Uzun v. Germany (Sept. 2010): -Interference: + -But foreseeability: less strict than in visual or acoustical surveillance cases. - Crucial question: small interference = no notification necessary? - No: although GPS surveillance is less infringing, notification is nonetheless required.

III. CoE and notification, 7. An exception from the notification duty? Mosley v. the United Kingdom (2011): ► Mosley v. the United Kingdom (2011): - Remedy: +, however, Art. 8 violation? - Balance between the freedom of the press and the respect for privacy. - ECtHR: Hypothetic effectiveness test of a pre-notification duty? Arguments base on the fact that the press may nonetheless act illegal. - Exception from the notification duty like in Directive 95/46.

III. CoE and notification, 8. Summary ►The ECtHR seems to be in favor of a notification duty after surveillance has ended. ►The case-law shows that notification is seen as an important safeguard against abuse and as tool to guarantee an effective remedy. ► The Ekimdzhiez case is a clear recognition of the notification duty. ► Mosley and Kennedy are exceptions from the duty. ► Violation of Art. 8 and Art. 13 ECHR if notification duty is not respected.

IV. Conclusion The notification is a general principle of human rights developed by the ECtHR (Article 8 and 13, recognition in Ekimdzhiev): safeguard against abuse and an important tool to guarantee an effective remedy, nonetheless it seems to be forgotten Principle 2.2 of Recommendation R 87 (15) must eventually be applied → also in the ordinary criminal procedure like in Germany It is time to recognise the notification duty not only in the framework of Directive 95/ The Mosley case is an important specification of the notification duty.

Thank you very much for your attention!