The Strasbourg Standards of Mass Surveillance of Communications
Autor/i: Miloš Biberdžić,
Stranice: 103-123
UDK: 343.14/.15
342.738
341.231.14(4)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.47152/rkkp.64.1.6
Apstrakt: This paper examines the standards governing mass surveillance of communications under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), as developed in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). It aims to identify, analyse, and systematise the Strasbourg standards binding the Contracting States in regulating mass surveillance of communications under the ECHR. The central research question is whether the Strasbourg case law provides a coherent and operational framework capable of reconciling national security imperatives with the effective protection of fundamental rights and freedoms. The analysis proceeds from doctrinal scholarship on mass surveillance, through an interpretative reading of the Convention, to a systematic assessment of the ECtHR’s jurisprudence, with cases selected for their role in shaping the scope, limits, and safeguards of bulk interception. The paper demonstrates that, under the ECHR, the ECtHR permits mass surveillance only conditionally and subject to strict safeguards. The analysis identifies five cumulative Strasbourg standards, articulated through corresponding safeguards, that structure the assessment of mass surveillance under the European Convention on Human Rights: legality, independent oversight, data protection safeguards, proportionality, and effective remedies. Rather than operating as isolated requirements, these standards function as interdependent elements of a coherent framework.
Ključne reči: mass surveillance, bulk interception, Strasbourg standards, data protection safeguards, proportionality, European Convention on Human Rights, chilling effect
Reference:
Bajović, V. (2022) 'EncroChat i Sky ECC komunikacija kao dokaz u krivičnom postupku', CRIMEN, 13(2), 154-179. https://doi.org/10.5937/crimen2202154B
Barocas, S. and Selbst, A.D. (2016) 'Big data's disparate impact', Calif. L. Rev., 104, 671-732. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2477899
Bernal, P. (2016) 'Data gathering, surveillance and human rights: recasting and debate', Journal of Cyber Policy, 1(2), 243-264. https://doi.org/10.1080/23738871.2016.1228990
Bernal, P. (2018) The Internet, warts and all: Free speech, privacy and truth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Beširević, V. et al. (2017) Komentar Konvencije za zaštitu ljudskih prava i osnovnih sloboda. Beograd: Službeni glasnik.
Carpenter, C. (2020) 'Privacy and proportionality: Examining mass electronic surveillance under Article 8 and the Fourth Amendment', International and Comparative Law Review, 20(1), 27-57. https://doi.org/10.2478/iclr-2020-0002
Celeste E. and Formici G. (2024) 'Constitutionalizing Mass Surveillance in the EU: Civil Society Demands, Judicial Activism, and Legislative Inertia', German Law Journal, 25(3), 427-446. https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2023.105
Dajović, G. and Spaić, B. (2019) 'Doktrina "četvrte instance" i pravo na obrazloženu presudu u praksi Evropskog suda za ljudska prava', Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu, 67(3), 158-185. https://doi.org/10.5937/AnaliPFB1903166D
ECtHR, Airey v. Ireland, no. 6289/73, Judgment of 9 October 1979 (Airey v. Ireland)
ECtHR, Big Brother Watch and Others v. UK, nos. 58170/13, 62322/14 and 24960/15, Judgment of 25 May 2021[GC] (Big Brother Watch and Others v. UK [GC])
ECtHR, Centrum för rättvisa v. Sweden, no. 35252/08, Judgment of 25 May 2021 [GC] (Centrum för rättvisa v. Sweden [GC])
ECtHR, Copland v. UK, no. 62617/00, Judgment of 03 April 2007 (Copland v. UK)
ECtHR, Djavit An v. Turkey, no. 20652/92, Judgment of 20 February 2003 (Djavit An v. Turkey)
ECtHR, Ekimdzhiev and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 70078/12, 11 January 2022 (Ekimdzhiev and Others v. Bulgaria)
ECtHR, Glukhin v. Russia, no. 11519/20, Judgment of 4 July 2023 (Glukhin v. Russia)
ECtHR, Gorzelik and Others v. Poland, no. 44158/98, Judgment of 17 February 2004 (Gorzelik and Others v. Poland)
ECtHR, Guja v. Moldova [GC], no. 14277/04, Judgment of 12 February 2008 [GC] (Guja v. Moldova [GC])
ECtHR, Huhtamäki v. Finland, no. 54468/09, Judgment of 6 March 2012 (Huhtamäki v. Finland)
ECtHR, Iordachi and Others v. Moldova, no. 25198/02, Judgment of 10 February 2009 (Iordachi and Others v. Moldova)
ECtHR, Iovchev v. Bulgaria, no. 41211/98, Judgment of 2 February 2006 (Iovchev v. Bulgaria)
ECtHR, Jalloh v. Germany, no. 54810/00, Judgment of 11 July 2006 [GC] (Jalloh v. Germany [GC])
ECtHR, Kafkaris v. Cyprus, no. 21906/04, Judgment of 12 February 2008 [GC] (Kafkaris v. Cyprus [GC])
ECtHR, Kennedy v. UK, no. 26839/05, Judgment of 18 May 2010 (Kennedy v. UK)
ECtHR, Kononov v. Latvia, no. 36376/04, Judgment of 17 May 2010 [GC] (Kononov v. Latvia [GC])
ECtHR, Leander v. Sweden, no. 9248/81, Judgment of 26 March 1987 (Leander v. Sweden)
ECtHR, Lorse and Others v. Netheralands, no. 52750/99, Judgment of 4 February 2003 (Lorse and Others v. Netheralands)
ECtHR, Malone v. UK, no. 8691/79, Judgment of 2 August 1984 (Malone v. UK)
ECtHR, Marinković v. Serbia, no. 5353/11, Judgment of 22 October 2013 (Marinković v. Serbia)
ECtHR, Michaud v. France, no. 12323/11, Judgment of 6 December 2012 (Michaud v. France)
ECtHR, Miroļubovs and Others v. Latvia, no. 798/05, Judgment of 15 September 2009 (Miroļubovs and Others v. Latvia)
ECtHR, Okpisz v. Germany, no. 59140/00, Judgment of 25 October 2005 (Okpisz v. Germany)
ECtHR, Pietrzak and Bychawska Siniarska and Others v. Poland, nos. 72038/17 and 25237/18 Judgment in French of 3 February 2022 (Pietrzak and Bychawska Siniarska and Others v. Poland)
ECtHR, Podchasov v. Russia, no. 33696/19, Judgment of 13 February 2024 (Podchasov v. Russia)
ECtHR, Roman Zakharov v. Russia, no. 47143/06, Judgment of 4 December 2015 [GC] (Roman Zakharov v. Russia [GC])
ECtHR, Rotaru v. Romania, no. 28341/95, Judgment of 4 May 2000 (Rotaru v. Romania)
ECtHR, Segerstedt-Wiberg and Others v. Sweden, no. 62332/00, Judgment of 6 June 2006 (Segerstedt-Wiberg and Others v. Sweden)
ECtHR, Sunday Times v. UK, no. 6538/74, Judgment of 26 April 1979 (Sunday Times v. UK)
ECtHR, Weber and Saravia v. Germany, no. 54934/00, Judgment of 29 June 2006 (Weber and Saravia v. Germany)
ECtHR, Yüksel Yalçınkaya v. Turkey, no. 15669/20, Judgment of 26 September 2023 [GC] (Yüksel Yalçınkaya v. Turkey [GC])
Europol (2020) Dismantling of encrypted network sends shockwaves through organised crime groups across Europe. Available at: https://www.europol.europa.eu/media-press/newsroom/news/dismantling-of-encrypted-network-sends-shockwaves-through-organised-crime-groups-across-europe(Accessed: 15 September 2025)
Ilić, G. P. (2011) 'Pravo na obrazloženu sudsku odluku', CRIMEN, 2(2), 227-244.
Ilić, G. P. (2015) 'O nezakonitim dokazima u krivičnom postupku', Kaznena reakcija u Srbiji, 5, 75-87.
Ilić, G. P. (2021) 'Arbitrarna primena prava i pravo na pravično suđenje', Kaznena reakcija u Srbiji, 11, 120-138.
Joint Committee on the Draft Investigatory Powers Bill (2016) Oral Evidence: Draft Investigatory Powers Committee. Available at: https://www.parliament.uk/globalassets/documents/joint-committees/draft-investigatory-powers-bill/oral-evidence-draft-investigatory-powers-committee.pdf (Accessed: 17 September 2025)
Kosta, E. (2020) 'Algorithmic state surveillance: Challenging the notion of agency in human rights', Regulation & Governance, 16, 212-224. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12331
Logan, S. (2017) 'The needle and the damage done: Of haystacks and anxious panopticons', Big Data & Society, 4(2), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517177345
Lynskey, O. (2023) 'Complete and effective data protection', Current Legal Problems, 76(1), 297-343. https://doi.org/10.1093/clp/cuad009
Macnish, K. (2020) 'Mass surveillance: A private affair?', Moral Philosophy and Politics, 7(1), 9-27. https://doi.org/10.1515/mopp-2019-0025
Miljuš I. (2021) Načelo jednakosti ''oružja'' u krivičnom postupku. Doktorska disertacija. Univerzitet u Beogradu.
Mitsilegas, V. et al. (2023) 'Data retention and the future of large scale surveillance: The evolution and contestation of judicial benchmarks', European Law Journal, 29(1-2), 176-211. https://doi.org/10.1111/eulj.12417
Murray, D. and Fussey, P. (2019) 'Bulk surveillance in the digital age: Rethinking the human rights law approach to bulk monitoring of communications data', Israel Law Review, 52(1), 31-60. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0021223718000304
Newell, B. C. (2014) 'The massive metadata machine: Liberty, power, and secret mass surveillance in the US and Europe', ISJLP, 10(2), 481-522.
Nissenbaum, H. (2010) Privacy in context: Technology, policy, and the integrity of social life. Stanford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780804772891
Paunović, M. and Carić, S. (2006) Evropski sud za ljudska prava osnovna načela i tok postupka. Beograd: Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu.
Pisarić, M. (2022) 'Communications encryption as an investigative obstacle', Revija za kriminologiju i krivično pravo, 60(1), 61-74. https://doi.org/10.47152/rkkp.60.1.4
Popović, D. (2008) Evropski sud za ljudska prava: između 11. i 14. dodatnog protokola uz konvenciju za zaštitu ljudskih prava i osnovnih sloboda. Beograd: Službeni glasnik.
Popovic, D. (2011) 'Uticaj Evropske Konvencije za zaštitu ljudskih prava i osnovnih sloboda na srpsko zakonodavstvo i sudsku praksu', Pravni Zapisi, 2(2), 343-357. https://doi.org/10.5937/pravzap1102343p
Richards, J. (2019) 'Needles in haystacks: law, capability, ethics, and proportionality in big data intelligence-gathering', Secret Intelligence, 2, 422-431. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429029028-28
Rojszczak, M. (2021) 'Extraterritorial bulk surveillance after the German BND act judgment', European Constitutional Law Review, 17(1), 53-77. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1574019621000055
Škulić, M. (2024) 'Dokazni značaj informacija iz komunikacije ostvarene aplikacijama/ modifikovanim uređajima za kriptovanje - kao što su Sky ecc i Enchrochat', CRIMEN, 15(1), 3-55. https://doi.org/10.5937/crimen2401003S
Slobogin, C. (2015) 'Standing and covert surveillance', Pepperdine Law Review, 42(3), 517-548.
Snowden, J. (2014) Snowden Answers Our Burning Data Collection Question: What's the Worst That Could Happen? Available at: https://techcrunch.com/2014/01/23/snowden-answers-our-burning-data-collection-question-whats-the-worst-that-could-happen/ (Accessed: 01 September 2025)
Turanjanin, V. (2025) 'EncroChat, Sky ECC and Regulation (EU) 2023/1543: towards a new standards of digital evidence (I)', Revija za kriminologiju i krivično pravo, 62(1), 7-30. https://doi.org/10.47152/rkkp.63.3.1
Van der Sloot, B. (2020) 'The quality of law: How the European Court of Human Rights gradually became a European Constitutional Court for privacy cases', Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and Electronic Commerce Law, 11, 160-185.
Vogiatzoglou, P. (2019) 'Mass surveillance, predictive policing and the implementation of the CJEU and ECtHR requirement of objectivity', European Journal of Law and Technology, 10(1).
Watt, E. (2017) 'The right to privacy and the future of mass surveillance', The International Journal of Human Rights, 21(7), 773–799. https://doi.org/10.1080/13642987.2017.1298091
Xu, X. (2021) 'To repress or to co-opt? Authoritarian control in the age of digital surveillance', American Journal of Political Science, 65(2), 309-325. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12514
Zalnieriute, M. (2022) 'Big brother watch and others v. the United Kingdom', American Journal of International Law, 116(3), 585-592. https://doi.org/10.1017/ajil.2022.35