The Legal Regulation of Special Means by the Intelligence Agency of the Slovak Republic within the Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights
1. Introduction. – 2. Intelligence Activity. – 3. Subjects of Intelligence Activity. – 4. Resources in Intelligence Activities. – 5. Selections from the Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights in Relation to Intelligence Services. – 6. Concluding Remarks.
Abstract
The article is focused on the use of special rights or means by the intelligence agency of the Slovak Republic. The use of these statutory means in a democratic society is in the public interest, especially in the context of current security challenges (e.g., international organised crime, terrorism, etc.). At the same time, however, the use of special means by the intelligence agency represents a significant interference with guaranteed fundamental human rights and freedoms, in particular, the right to privacy.
In the article, the author provides an overview of the current legal regulation on the use of special means by the intelligence services of the Slovak Republic, which he assesses from the point of view of compliance with the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. After a critical evaluation, the author states that the legal regulation is likely to require an amendment in the short term to ensure compliance with Art. 8 of the Convention: the right to respect for private and family life. Then, in the case of a complaint by a Slovak citizen regarding interference with the right to privacy using special means by the intelligence agencies of the Slovak Republic, it can be said that there was a violation of this right.
About Authors
Adrián Vaško
Senior Lecturer at the Department of Penal Law, Criminology, Criminalistics and Forensic Sciences, Matej Bel University, Slovakia
adrian.vasko@umb.sk
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2113-7909
Corresponding author, solely responsible for writing, conceptualization, data curation, and methodology. Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Disclaimer: The author declares that his opinion and views expressed in this article are free of any impact of any organizations.
Managing editor – Dr. Olena Terekh. English Editor – Dr. Sarah White.
Copyright: © 2022 A Vaško. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
References
1. Act no. 46/1993 Coll. on the Slovak Information Service, as amended <https://www.slov-lex.sk/pravne-predpisy/SK/ZZ/1993/46/20160101> accessed 22 January 2022; Act no. 198/1994 Coll. on Military Intelligence, as amended <https://www.slov-lex.sk/pravne-predpisy/SK/ZZ/1994/198/20180401> accessed 22 January 2022.
2. Vaško A, ‘Možnosti využitia spravodajských informácií v trestnom konaní’ in Bratislavské právnické fórum 2019: zákonnosť a prípustnosť dôkazov v trestnom konaní: zborník príspevkov z medzinárodnej vedeckej konferencie, Bratislava, 14. - 15. februára 2019 (Bratislava, Univerzita Komenského v Bratislave 2019) 88-99.
3. Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms <https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/convention_eng.pdf> accessed 22 January 2022.
4. Lisoň M, Vaško A, ‘Teorie zpravodajské činnosti’ in V Porada et al (eds) Bezpečnostní vědy (Plzeň, Aleš Čeněk s.r.o. 2019) 375 et seq.
5. Laml R, ‘Národné a nadnárodné z hľadiska spravodajskej činnosti malej krajiny’ in Zborník z medzinárodného sympózia, ktorú zorganizovali Asociácia bývalých spravodajských dôstojníkov spolu s Fakultou práva Paneurópskej vysokej školy dňa 8. 12. 2010 na tému ‘Národné versus nadnárodné záujmy v činnosti spravodajských služieb’. (Bratislava: Eurokódex 2010) 3-9.
6. Grach M, ‘Spravodajské služby a ochrana štátu’ in Literárny týždenník (Bratislava 1998) 5.
7. Act no. 166/2003 Coll. on the Privacy Protection against Unauthorized Use of Information and Technical Means and on the amendments and supplementation of some laws, as amended < https://www.slov-lex.sk/pravne-predpisy/SK/ZZ/2003/166/20160101> accessed 22 January 2022.
8. Tittlová M, ‘Teoretické a praktické problémy odpočúvania a záznamu telekomunikačnej prevádzky v trestnom konaní’ in J Záhora (ed), Teoretické a praktické problémy využívania informačno-technických prostriedkov v trestnom konaní (Praha, Leges 2017) 288.
9. Szabó and Vissy v Hungary, App no 37138/14 <http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-160020)> accessed 22 January 2022.
10. Pysk V, ‘Z aktuální judikatury Evropského soudu pro lidská práva – ochrana utajovaných informácií’ in Správní právo, Legislativní příloha č. II, ročník X (Praha, Ministerstvo vnitra České republiky 2018) XLII- XLIX.
11. Klass and others v Germany, App no 5029/71, Judgment of 6 September 1978 <https://www.stradalex.com/en/sl_src_publ_jur_int/document/echr_5029-71> accessed 22 January 2022.
12. R Zakharov v Russia, App no 47143/06, Judgment of the Grand Chamber of 4 December 2015 <https://policehumanrightsresources.org/roman-zakharov-v-russia-47143-06> accessed 22 January 2022.
13. Amann v Switzerland, App no 27798/95, Judgment of the Grand Chamber of 16 February 2000 <https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre#{%22fulltext%22:[%22Amann%20v.%20Switzerland%22],%22documentcollectionid2%22:[%22GRANDCHAMBER%22,%22CHAMBER%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-58497%22]}> accessed 22 January 2022.
14. Kennedy v The United Kingdom, App no 26839/05, Judgment of 15 May 2010 <https://www.stradalex.com/en/sl_src_publ_jur_int/document/echr_26839-05> accessed 22 January 2022.
15. Telegraaf Media Nederland Landelijke Media BV and others v The Netherlands, App no 39315/06, Judgment of 22 November 2012 <https://www.stradalex.com/nl/sl_src_publ_jur_int/document/echr_39315-06_001-99089> accessed 22 January 2022.
16. Lambert v France, App no 23618/94, Judgment of 24 August 1998 <https://www.stradalex.com/en/sl_src_publ_jur_int/document/cedh_23618-94_001-47619> accessed 22 January 2022.
17. Savovi v Bulgaria, App no 7222/05, Judgment of 27 November 2012 <https://www.stradalex.com/fr/sl_src_publ_jur_int/document/echr_7222-05> accessed 22 January 2022.
18. Copland v The United Kingdom, App no 62617/00, Judgment of 3 April 2007 <https://www.5rb.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Copland-v-UK-ECHR-3-Apr-2007.pdf> accessed 22 January 2022.
19. Uzun v Germany, App no 35623/05, Judgment of 2 September 2010 <https://www.legislationline.org/download/id/7570/file/ECHR_case_Uzun_v_Germany_2010_en.pdf> accessed 22 January 2022.
20. Dumitru Popescu v Romania (No 2), App no 71525/01, Judgment of 26 April 2007 <https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-80352%22]}> accessed 22 January 2022.
21. Association for European Integration and Human Rights and Ekimdzhiev v Bulgaria, App no 62540/00, Judgment of 28 June 2007 <https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-81323%22]}> accessed 22 January 2022.
22. Weber and Saravia v Germany, App no 54934/00 <https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-76586%22]}> accessed 22 January 2022.
23. Teixeira de Castro v Portugal, App no 25829/94, 9 June 1998 <https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-58193%22]}> accessed 22 January 2022.
Ramanauskas v Lithuania, App no 74420/01, 5 February 2008 <https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-84866%22]}> accessed 22 January 2022.
Reviews for article
Add a Review
Keywords
- intelligence agency, intelligence activity, intelligence, special means, privacy protection
How to cite it?
-
A Vaško ‘The Legal Regulation of Special Means by the Intelligence Agency of the Slovak Republic within the Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights’ 2022 3(15) Access to Justice in Eastern Europe 57-72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33327/AJEE-18-5.3-a000309
