The option for security agencies, acting on an opinion which is not subject to court appraisal, to access information, is a grave breach of the Constitution.
Interception and keeping information on electronic communications – telephone call listings, to put it simply – can be done by security agencies without any court decision, if the new “Draft Rulebook on technical requirements for equipment and software for legal interception of electronic communications and keeping data on electronic communications” is adopted.
Some provisions of this bylaw allow for violations of basic human rights, introduce uncertainties and enable arbitrary interpretations, warns Rodoljub Sabic, Commisisoner for Information of Public Importance and Personal Data Protection, who forwarded yesterday his opinion on the Rulebook to the Ministry of Culture, Media and Information Society, competent for this area.
The Draft Rulebook, as Sabic says, mentions a term with multiple meanings “Order”, not “Court Decision” as a basis for access to so-called kept information on electronic communications.
- The unlimited opportunity, acting on an opinion which is not subject to court appraisal, for security agencies to access information on who and when communicates with whom, during what time periods, and using which type of connection and from which location, is an extremely serious deviation from the constitutional guarantee of sanctity of letters and other means of communication – explains the Commissioner for Information of Public Importance.
New terms introduced by the Rulebook, such as “covert surveillance of user location” and “specially protected users”, have no legal basis in the Law on Electronic Communications.
The provision on covert surveillance of user location, whether or not he is involved in communication, is very problematic, says Sabic.
– We are dealing here with processing personal data, which should be regulated by laws, and not bylaws. Although establishing the location of users in certain situations, may, of course, be useful, not only for investigation, criminal proceedings or protection of national security interests, but also to protect lives, as might be the case with disappearance of people during disasters, but it cannot be regulated in this Rulebook – emphasized Sabic in his interview for “Politika”.
Also, the Draft Rulebook does not clearly specify who ‘specially protected users” are.
– It is about persons listed by the Security Intelligence Agency (BIA) in cooperation with the Ministry of Interior Affairs and Ministry of Defence, but the Law on Electronic Communications does not include this category of citizens– explains Sabic and adds that in the fight against terrorism and organized crime, the state must observe certain limits pertaining to citizens’ privacy, which are set out in the Constitution.
– This Rulebook oversteps these boundaries. Suspicion that they went too far made many European states re-examine their decisions which allowed intrusion into citizens’ privacy, albeit to combat the very real threat of terrorism – says Sabic, adding that this was the reason for re-examination of some European Directives.
