Privacy and Phone-Tapping: The Price of Justice in the European Union

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Pereira, Alexandre Libório Dias
Data de Publicação: 2001
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10316/28747
Resumo: Phone tapping has been an evolving issue concerning the protection of the right of privacy under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In several cases, namely Klass, Malone and Kruslin&Huvig, the European Court of Human Rights did set up a number of requirements that national legislations must comply with concerning the admissibility of telephone-tapping as an important tool of criminal procedure, since it is understood as an infringement of the right of privacy provided by Article 8 of the ECHR, despite its wording. Moreover, the Court did also establish the requirements for the use illegally collected evidence (i.e. evidence collected without compliance of phone-tapping requirements), which are different from the American exclusionary rules (“Miranda's Rights” Doctrine) and the German «Beweisverbote» (the BGH «evaluation of interests» Criteria and the Doctrine of the “three spheres of privacy”). At the same time, in case Schenk, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) seemed to reject a strict application of the doctrine of the "fruit of the poisonous tree" (US Supreme Court) and the BGH “Fernwirkung” criteria. This paper, originally drafted for European Criminal Law at the Catholic University of Leuven as Erasmus student, questions whether the impact of the ECHR’s case-law on national legislation of Member States is not leading towards a Uniform European Criminal Law.
id RCAP_594119b4a0cad090fdc147ebcb0aa925
oai_identifier_str oai:estudogeral.uc.pt:10316/28747
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling Privacy and Phone-Tapping: The Price of Justice in the European Unionprivacidadeescutas telefónicasprocesso penaldireitos humanosPhone tapping has been an evolving issue concerning the protection of the right of privacy under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In several cases, namely Klass, Malone and Kruslin&Huvig, the European Court of Human Rights did set up a number of requirements that national legislations must comply with concerning the admissibility of telephone-tapping as an important tool of criminal procedure, since it is understood as an infringement of the right of privacy provided by Article 8 of the ECHR, despite its wording. Moreover, the Court did also establish the requirements for the use illegally collected evidence (i.e. evidence collected without compliance of phone-tapping requirements), which are different from the American exclusionary rules (“Miranda's Rights” Doctrine) and the German «Beweisverbote» (the BGH «evaluation of interests» Criteria and the Doctrine of the “three spheres of privacy”). At the same time, in case Schenk, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) seemed to reject a strict application of the doctrine of the "fruit of the poisonous tree" (US Supreme Court) and the BGH “Fernwirkung” criteria. This paper, originally drafted for European Criminal Law at the Catholic University of Leuven as Erasmus student, questions whether the impact of the ECHR’s case-law on national legislation of Member States is not leading towards a Uniform European Criminal Law.2001info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlehttp://hdl.handle.net/10316/28747http://hdl.handle.net/10316/28747engPereira, Alexandre Libório Diasinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2020-05-25T13:23:19Zoai:estudogeral.uc.pt:10316/28747Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T20:40:41.291057Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Privacy and Phone-Tapping: The Price of Justice in the European Union
title Privacy and Phone-Tapping: The Price of Justice in the European Union
spellingShingle Privacy and Phone-Tapping: The Price of Justice in the European Union
Pereira, Alexandre Libório Dias
privacidade
escutas telefónicas
processo penal
direitos humanos
title_short Privacy and Phone-Tapping: The Price of Justice in the European Union
title_full Privacy and Phone-Tapping: The Price of Justice in the European Union
title_fullStr Privacy and Phone-Tapping: The Price of Justice in the European Union
title_full_unstemmed Privacy and Phone-Tapping: The Price of Justice in the European Union
title_sort Privacy and Phone-Tapping: The Price of Justice in the European Union
author Pereira, Alexandre Libório Dias
author_facet Pereira, Alexandre Libório Dias
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Pereira, Alexandre Libório Dias
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv privacidade
escutas telefónicas
processo penal
direitos humanos
topic privacidade
escutas telefónicas
processo penal
direitos humanos
description Phone tapping has been an evolving issue concerning the protection of the right of privacy under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In several cases, namely Klass, Malone and Kruslin&Huvig, the European Court of Human Rights did set up a number of requirements that national legislations must comply with concerning the admissibility of telephone-tapping as an important tool of criminal procedure, since it is understood as an infringement of the right of privacy provided by Article 8 of the ECHR, despite its wording. Moreover, the Court did also establish the requirements for the use illegally collected evidence (i.e. evidence collected without compliance of phone-tapping requirements), which are different from the American exclusionary rules (“Miranda's Rights” Doctrine) and the German «Beweisverbote» (the BGH «evaluation of interests» Criteria and the Doctrine of the “three spheres of privacy”). At the same time, in case Schenk, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) seemed to reject a strict application of the doctrine of the "fruit of the poisonous tree" (US Supreme Court) and the BGH “Fernwirkung” criteria. This paper, originally drafted for European Criminal Law at the Catholic University of Leuven as Erasmus student, questions whether the impact of the ECHR’s case-law on national legislation of Member States is not leading towards a Uniform European Criminal Law.
publishDate 2001
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2001
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10316/28747
http://hdl.handle.net/10316/28747
url http://hdl.handle.net/10316/28747
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799133672098496512