Centrum för rättvisa v. Sweden (referral)

Information Note on the Court’s case-law 226

February 2019

Centrum för rättvisa v. Sweden (referral) - 35252/08

Judgment 19.6.2018 [Section III]

Article 8

Article 8-1

Respect for correspondence

Proportionality and safeguards of Swedish legislation on signals intelligence: case referred to the Grand Chamber

The applicant association is a non-profit-making Swedish organisation who represents clients claiming to have suffered breaches of their rights and freedoms under the Convention and under Swedish law, in particular in litigation against the State. Having regard to the nature of its functions as a non-governmental organisation closely monitoring the activities of State actors, it considers that there is a risk that its communications through mobile telephones and mobile broadband have been or will be intercepted and examined by way of signals intelligence.

In a judgment of 19 June 2018 (see Information Note 219), a Chamber of the Court unanimously found no violation of Article 8, having assessed in particular: the scope of the signals intelligence activities; the duration of the secret surveillance measures; the system for authorising such measures; the procedures governing the storage, consultation, examination, exploitation and destruction of the data intercepted; the conditions under which the intercepted data could be communicated to third parties; oversight of the implementation of secret surveillance measures; notification of those measures and available remedies.

The Chamber took the view that, although improvements could be made in some areas, the Swedish signals intelligence system, viewed in abstracto, did not display any major shortcomings in terms of its structure and mode of operation, which were proportionate to the aim sought to be attained. Furthermore, the system provided adequate and sufficient safeguards against arbitrariness and the risk of abuse. However, that finding did not preclude in concreto consideration of the State’s responsibility under the Convention in cases where, for instance, an applicant was apprised of an actual instance of data interception.

On 4 February 2019 the case was referred to the Grand Chamber at the applicant’s request.

© Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights
This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court.

Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes

Full & Egal Universal Law Academy