case law of the european court of human rights concerning the ...

10. The Court found that the legislation in question has an aim that is legitimate under paragraph 2
of Article 8, namely the safeguarding of national security and the prevention of disorder or crime. It
then went on to consider whether the means adopted remain within the bounds of what is necessary
in a democratic society in order to achieve that aim.
11. (a) The Court took notice of the fact that "democratic societies nowadays find themselves
threatened by highly sophisticated. forms of espionage and by terrorism, with the result that the
State must be able, in order effectively to counter such threats, to undertake the secret surveillance
of subversive elements operating within its jurisdiction". It had therefore to be accepted that "the
existence of some legislation granting powers of secret surveillance over the mail, post and ,
telecommunications is, under exceptional conditions, necessary in a democratic Society in the
interests of national security and/or for the prevention of disorder or crime".
(b) Although recognising that the Convention leaves to Contracting States a certain discretion as
regards the fixing of the conditions under which the system of surveillance is to be operated, the
judgment continues: " ... this does not mean that the Contracting States enjoy an unlimited discretion
to subject persons within their jurisdiction to secret surveillance. The Court, being aware of the
danger such a law poses of undermining or even destroying democracy on the ground of defending
it, affirms that the Contracting States may not, in the name of the struggle against espionage and
terrorism, adopt whatever measures they deem appropriate!” "The Court must be satisfied that,
whatever system is adopted, there exist adequate and effective guarantees against abuse."
12. In the light of these considerations, the Court then examined the functioning of the system of
secret surveillance established by the contested legislation. The judgment notes in particular that:
- according to that legislation, a series of limitative conditions have to be satisfied before a
surveillance measure can be ordered ;
- strict conditions are laid down with regard to the implementation of the surveillance measures and
to the processing of the information thereby obtained ;
- while "in a field where abuse is potentially so easy in individual cases and could have such harmful
consequences for democratic society as a whole, it is in principle desirable to entrust supervisory
control to a judge”, the two supervisory bodies instituted by the legislation “may, in the
circumstances of the case, be regarded as enjoying sufficient independence to give an objective
ruling”;
- the fact of not informing the individual once surveillance has ceased cannot itself be incompatible
with Article 8 since it is this very fact which ensures the efficacy of the measure.
13. The Court accordingly found no breach of Article 8.
[Paragraphs 39 to 60 of the judgment.]
C. Article 13
14. The Court then examined the case under Article 13 which guarantees that everyone whose rights
and freedoms as set forth in the Convention are violated shall have an effective remedy before a
national authority. The Court found, inter alia, that:
13