Thomas Christian Bächle
After the major shift in surveillance practices from state power and control to big tech corporations and monetisation, we are currently witnessing yet another Zeitenwende: Surveillance practices as a means of hybrid warfare, with the AI-driven vision of accessing what people think and feel. This type of surveillance produces knowledge that not only claims to reveal what people are likely to do in the future but also what they feel and think. The consequences of this epistemological bending are potentially grave.
Continue reading >>
André Bartsch, Johanna Fink, Jakob Mutter, Marc Bovermann, Isabelle Weis
Nowadays, data is mostly collected not by state actors but by businesses. In 2010, the German Constitutional Court held that the legislator has to evaluate the overall level of surveillance in Germany before enacting new data retention obligations. In light of the recent rejuvenised discussions about data retention and a general surveillance account, this text explores whether such an account needs to consider private data pools and what is required for a successful evaluation.
Continue reading >>
Chiara Graziani
This blog post compares the European and US approach to metadata surveillance and highlights some challenges that arise therefrom. It aims at shedding light on the main legal issues that may arise for the future of global counterterrorism. The essential role of courts in striking and keeping a balance between security and protection of human rights is further examined in light of the judgement in La Quadrature du Net II. Efforts should be made to avoid that the economic power of the US would lower the privacy standards when it comes to metadata surveillance.
Continue reading >>
Giulia Formici
The Court of Justice’s Quadrature du Net judgements mark another key moment in the complex and long-lasting legal debate on mass data retention in the European Union. This blogpost critically discusses the “constitutionalisation path” outlined by the EU Judges as well as the fragmented roads taken by Member States, with specific attention to Italy. Ultimately, it demonstrates the need for a decisive EU legislators’ intervention, able to draw the future path of data retention regimes.
Continue reading >>
Elif Mendos Kuşkonmaz
Is general and indiscriminate data retention permissible under the EU fundamental rights framework? In La Quadrature du Net II, the Court tilts the metaphorical scale towards data retention. The take-away could contribute to the enlargement of privatised surveillance that rests on a generalised pre-emptive data retention scheme. The ECJ’s findings could cement intrusive practices emerging from the counter-terrorism narrative to regular state practice at the expense of fundamental rights protection.
Continue reading >>
Ana Bobić
The classic story about the right to privacy and data protection in the EU is one of a high level of protection. Yet, this original rosy image is increasingly fading away, most visibly in the La Quadrature du Net litigation, which is a continuation of two dynamics. First, the Court is still cleaning up the residual mess that lingers on from the now annulled Data Retention Directive. Second, in so doing, it is incrementally allowing the Member States indiscriminately retain personal data. Hence, the Court is carving out space for Member States’ preferences to the detriment of the protection of the individual.
Continue reading >>
Lukas Martin Landerer
Die jüngeren Urteile des EuGHs zur Vorratsdatenspeicherung sind nicht als „kopernikanische Wende“ zu verstehen, in der der EuGH sein Selbstverständnis als Grundrechtsgericht aufgegeben hätte. Sie sind keine autoritär motivierte Abkehr von einer vormals grundrechtsfreundlichen Rechtsprechung. Vielmehr fügen sich die Urteile ein in die komplexe Entwicklung des ursprünglich national geprägten Sicherheitsverfassungsrechts. Diese Einordnung bedarf eines genaueren Blickes.
Continue reading >>
Lukas Martin Landerer
The recent judgements of the CJEU on data retention should not be regarded as an authoritarian move towards a less fundamental rights-sensible position of the Court. Rather, the case law adapts the ever more complex development of the constitutional security law, which was originally dominated by the Member States. As a European court, the CJEU cannot simply ban certain police measures but must respect the complexity and heterogeneity of national law enforcement agencies.
Continue reading >>
Erik Tuchtfeld
Mass data retention is on the rise. In the current heyday of security packages in Germany, we are now witnessing a “super grand coalition” in favor of mandatory IP address retention. Some are calling for greater protection for victims through data retention. Yet, what one often overlooks is the following: The investigative capacities of law enforcement authorities have never been better, and the digital data pools that can be analyzed have never been larger. Hence, victims must be protected without mass surveillance.
Continue reading >>
Joachim Herrmann
Mass data retention is all about proportionality. The threat level determines the proportionality of the means – both of which are subject to the perpetual flux of time. Data retention is intended to protect victims of digital crimes. To protect freedom online, our security services urgently need to be able to access stored IP addresses. The alarming developments in our security situation are calling many certainties from the past into question. This also involves a re-evaluation of traffic data retention.
Continue reading >>
Erik Tuchtfeld
Ten years after its groundbreaking judgment declaring the Data Retention Directive incompatible with the EU Charter, the Full Court significantly eased its previously strict requirements. On 30 April 2024, it issued La Quadrature Du Net II and, for the first time, declared the general and indiscriminate retention of IP addresses permissible for the purpose of fighting general crime. Given the CJEU’s fundamental change of heart, we have gathered a range of scholars to contextualize the judgment and situate it within the broader debate on mass data retention, online surveillance, and anonymity.
Continue reading >>
