The role of constitutional courts in taming adverse impact of new technologies in the criminal proceedings

• Marcia, Michalina ^[1]
  1. [1] University of Wrocław

     University of Wrocław

     Breslavia, Polonia

     
• Localización: Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal, ISSN-e 2525-510X, Vol. 8, Nº. 1, 2022
• Idioma: inglés
• DOI: 10.22197/rbdpp.v8i1.678
• Títulos paralelos:
  • O papel das cortes constitucionais em reduzir os impactos negativos das novas tecnologias no processo penal
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo (pdf)
• Resumen
  • português

    Este artigo apresenta os impactos das cortes constitucionais em modelar os parâmetros do devido processo no contexto da aplicação das novas tecnologias no processo penal. Medidas de vigilância baseadas no uso de novas tecnologias pelas agências de persecução são altamente intrusivos em essência e podem violar não somente o direito constitucional à privacidade, mas também, na visão da autora, garantias do devido processo e direitos processuais do suspeito. O objetivo deste artigo é indicar qual a extensão da contribuição das cortes constitucionais para o estabelecimento de critérios processuais nas atividades de obtenção de provas por meio de novas tecnologias (em relação tanto ao conteúdo quanto à metadata), assim como apresentar os potenciais problemas nesse tema, os quais deverão ser enfrentados pelas cortes no futuro.

  • English

    This article presents the impact of constitutional courts in shaping the fair trial standards in the context of new technologies application in the criminal proceedings. Surveillance measures based on the use of new technologies by law enforcement agencies are highly intrusive in nature and may violate not only the constitutional right to privacy, but also, in the author's opinion, guarantees of the fair trial and procedural rights of the suspect. The aim of the article is to indicate to what extent constitutional courts have contributed to establishing the procedural standards in the activities of gathering evidence using new technologies (regarding both content and metadata), as well as to present potential problems in this area that courts will have to face in the future.

• Referencias bibliográficas
  • ACT ON THE POLICE of 6 April 1990, Dziennik Ustaw, item 1882
  • ADAM, Lisanne, BARNS, Greg. Digital strip searches in Australia: A threat to the privilege against self-incrimination, Alternative Law Journal,...
  • AKTHER, Shajeda; NORDIN, Rohaida. An Analysis of Fair Trial Guarantees at Trial Stage under the ECHR, Law Review p. 211-234, 2015
  • ATTORNEY GENERAL. Motion of 12 November 2015 r., PG VIII TKw 41/14
  • BACHMAIER, Lorena. Exclusionary Rules of Evidence in Spain. In: THAMAN, Stephen (ed.). Truth versus Legality in a Comparative View, Heidelberg:...
  • BACHMAIER WINTER, Lorena. Remote computer searches under Spanish Law: The proportionality principle and the protection of privacy. Zeitschrift...
  • BANASZAK, Bogusław. Konstytucja Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej. Komentarz, Warszawa: C.H.Beck, p. 212, 2012
  • BARAK, Aharon. Proportionality. Constitutional Rights and Their Limitations, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p. 472, 2006
  • BARKHUYSEN, Tom, EMMERIK, VAN, Michiel, JANSEN, Oswald, FEDOROVA, Masha. Right to a Fair Trial. In: DIJK, VAN, Pieter, HOOF, Van, Fried RIJN,...
  • BULGARIAN SUPREME ADMINISTRATIVE COURT. Decision No 13627, 11 December 2008
  • BRADSHAW Robert. Deception and detection: the use of technology in assessing witness credibility, Arbitration International, v. 37, no. 3,...
  • BREMS, Eva. Conflicting human rights: an exploration in the context of the right to a fair trial in the European Convention for the protection...
  • CARNES, Brittany A. Face ID and Fingerprints: Modernizing Fifth Amendment Protections for Cell Phones, Loyola Law Review, v. 66, n.1, p. 183-210,...
  • CHOPRA, Pran. The Constitution and Supreme Court. Economic and Political Weekly, v. 39 no. 30, p. 3355–3359, 2004. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4415313
  • CHOUDHRY, Sujit (ed.). The Migration of Constitutional Ideals, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006
  • CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF POLAND of 2nd April 1997, published in Dziennik Ustaw No. 78, item 483
  • CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF ROMANIA. Decision No 1258 of 8 October 2009
  • CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SPAIN. Judgment 253/2006 of 11 September 2006
  • CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SPAIN. Decision STC 114/184
  • CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF THE CZECH REPUBLIC. Decision of 22 March 2011, Pl. ÚS 24/10
  • CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF THE CZECH REPUBLIC. Decision of 22 December 2011, Pl. ÚS 24/11
  • CONSTITUTIONAL TRIBUNAL OF POLAND. Judgment of 11 February 1992 r., K 14/91
  • CONSTITUTIONAL TRIBUNAL OF POLAND. Judgment of 26 January 1993, U 10/92
  • CONSTITUTIONAL TRIBUNAL OF POLAND. Judgment of 17 October 1995, K 10/95
  • CONSTITUTIONAL TRIBUNAL OF POLAND. Judgment of 25 November 2003, K 37/02
  • CONSTITUTIONAL TRIBUNAL OF POLAND. Judgment of May, 17 2004, SK 32/03
  • CONSTITUTIONAL TRIBUNAL OF POLAND. Judgment of December, 12 2005 r., K 32/04
  • CONSTITUTIONAL TRIBUNAL OF POLAND. Judgment of 9 July 2009, SK 48/05
  • CONSTITUTIONAL TRIBUNAL OF POLAND. Judgment of 25 July 2013, P 56/11
  • CONSTITUTIONAL TRIBUNAL OF POLAND. Judgment of April 30, 2014, K 23/11
  • CONSTITUTIONAL TRIBUNAL OF POLAND. Judgment of 5 June 2014 r., K 35/11
  • CONSTITUTIONAL TRIBUNAL OF POLAND. Judgment of 14 July 2015, SK 26/14
  • CONSTITUTIONAL TRIBUNAL OF POLAND. Judgment of 4 November 2015, K 1/14
  • CONSTITUTIONAL TRIBUNAL OF POLAND. Decision of June, 30 2021 r., K32/05
  • COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Judgment of 8 April 2014, joined Cases C 293/12 and C 594/12, Digital Rights Ireland Ltd v Minister...
  • COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Judgment of 21 December 2016, joined Cases C-203/15 and C-698/15 Tele2 Sverige AB v Post- och telestyrelsen...
  • COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Judgment of October, 6 2020, La Quadrature du Net and Others v Premier ministre and Others, joined...
  • COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Judgment of 6 October 2020, Case C-623/17 Privacy International v Secretary of State for Foreign and...
  • COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Judgment (Grand Chamber), 2 March 2021, C-746/18, Criminal proceedings against H. K., EU:C:2021:152
  • CZERNIAK, Dominika. Collection of location data in criminal proceedings – European (the EU and Strasbourg) standards. Revista Brasileira de...
  • DEENER, David. Judicial Review in Modern Constitutional Systems. The American Political Science Review, v. 46 no, 4, 1079–1099, 1952. https://doi.org/10.2307/1952114
  • DE VRIES, Katja, BELLANOVA Rocco, DE HERT Paul, GUTWIRTH Serge. The German Constitutional Court Judgment on Data Retention: Proportionality...
  • DIRECTIVE 2006/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the retention of data generated or processed in connection...
  • DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, State v. Stahl, 206 So. 3d 124, 136-37 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)
  • DIXON, Rosalind. Updating Constitutional Rules. The Supreme Court Review, no. 1, p. 319–346, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1086/653651
  • EUROJUST. Data retention regimes in Europe in light of the CJEU ruling of 21 December 2016 in Joined Cases C-203/15 and C-698/15 – Report,...
  • EUROPEAN CONVENTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS, adopted in Rome on 4th November 1950. Available at: https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf...
  • EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. Judgment of 8 February 1996, John Murray v. the United Kingdom (app. no. 18731/91)
  • EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. Judgment of 29 June 2006, Weber and Saravia v. Germany, (app. no. 54934/00)
  • EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. Judgment of 29 June 2007, O’Halloran and Francis v. the United Kingdom, (app. nos. 15809/02 and 25624/02)
  • EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. Judgment of 4 December 2008, S. and Marper v. the United Kingdom (app. nos. 30562/04 and 30566/04)
  • EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. Judgment of 17 December 2009, B.B. v. France (app. no. 5335/06),
  • EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. Judgment of 17 December 2009, Gardel v. France and M.B. v. France (app. no. 22115/06)
  • EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS Judgment of 2 Sptember 2010, Uzun v. Germany (app. no. 35623/05)
  • EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. Judgment of 21 June 2011, Shimovolos v. Russia (app. no. 30194/09)
  • EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. Judgment of 3 July 2012, Robathin v. Austria (app. no. 30457/06)
  • EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. Judgment of 18 April 2013, M.K. v. France (app. no. 19522/09)
  • EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. Judgment of 18 September 2014, Brunet v. France (app. no. 21010/10)
  • EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. Judgment of 12 January 2016, Szabó and Vissy v. Hungary (app. no. 37138/14)
  • EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. Judgment of 30 May 2017, Trabajo Rueda v. Spain (app. no. 32600/12)
  • EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. Judgment of 22 June 2017, Aycaguer v. France, (app. no. 8806/12)
  • EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. Judgment of 13 February 2020, Gaughran v. the United Kingdom (app. no. 45245/15)
  • EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. Judgment of 25 May 2021, Centrum För Rättvisa v. Sweden (app. no. 35252/08)
  • EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. Judgment of 16 November 2021, Vasil Vasiliev v. Bulgaria, (app. no. 7610/15)
  • EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. Judgment of 14 October 2021, Lysusk v. Ukraine, (app. no. 72531/1)
  • EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. Press Unit, Factsheet – new technologies, 2021. Available at: AccessedJanuary 9, 2022
  • EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE. Opinion EESC 2018/02737, OJ C 367, 10.10.2018, p. 88–92. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CONSIL:ST_11314_2021_INIT&from=EN.
  • FARAHANY, Nita. Incriminating Thoughts. Stanford Law Review, v. 64 no. 2, p. 351–408, 2012
  • FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL COURT. Judgment of 7 April 1998, 2 BvR 1827/97 https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Entscheidungen/DE/1998/04/rk19980407_2bvr182797.html
  • FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL COURT. Judgment of the First Senate of 27 February 2008, 1 BvR 370/07, 1 BvR 595/07
  • FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL COURT. Judgment of the First Senate of 20 April 2016, 1 BvR 966/09, 1 BvR 1140/09
  • FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL COURT. Press release no 11/2010 of 2 March 2010
  • FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA, Luppino v Fisher (No 2) [2019] FCA 1100
  • FISCHER, Larissa BETTINA, Paul, VOIGT, TORSTEN, Voigt. Wahrheit unter dem Vergrößerungsglas. Vorstellungen von Subjekt und Technik in der...
  • FUNDACJA PANOPTYKON. Telefoniczna Kopalnia Informacji. Przewodnik, p. 20. Available at: https://panoptykon.org/biblio/telefoniczna–kopalnia–informacji–przewodnik....
  • GARLICKI, Lech; WOJTYCZEK, Krzysztof. Komentarz do art. 31 Konstytucji. In: GARLICKI, Lech; ZUBIK, Marek (ed.). Konstytucja Rzeczypospolitej...
  • GERSTEIN, Robert. Privacy and self-incrimination. In SCHOEMAN, Ferdinand David (ed.), Philosophical Dimensions of Privacy: An Anthology, Cambridge:...
  • GOLDMAN, Kara. Biometric passwords and the privilege against self-incrimination. Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal, v. 33, no....
  • GWIRDWOYŃ, WEIGEND, Ewa, WIDACKI, Jan, WÓJCIKIEWICZ, Józef.
  • German Supreme Court’s alleged approval of polygraph examination in criminal proceedings, Prokuratura i Prawo, n. 7-8, 2009
  • HARRIS, David. The right to a fair trial in criminal proceedings as a human right, International & Comparative Law Quarterly, v. 16 n....
  • HERRERA, Adam. Biometric Passwords and the Fifth Amendment: How Technology Has Outgrown the Right to Be Free from Self-Incrimination, UCLA...
  • INDIANA COURT OF APPEALS. Seo v. State, 109 N.E.3d 418, 425-31 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018) 2018 WL 6565988 (Ind. Dec. 6, 2018)
  • JACKSON, Vicki. Constitutional Engagement in a Transnational Era, Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 60, 2010
  • JUSZCZAK, Adam, SASON, Elisa. Recalibrating Data Retention in the EU. The Jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the EU on Data Retention...
  • KUMM, Mattias. Constitutional Rights as Principles, International Journal of Constitutional Law v. 2, p. 595, 2004, https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/2.3.574
  • LACH, Arkadiusz. Rzetelne postępowanie dowodowe w sprawach karnych w świetle orzecznictwa strasburskiego, Warszawa: Wolters Kluwer Polska,...
  • LOFTUS, Bethan. Normalizing covert surveillance: the subterranean world of policing, The British Journal of Sociology, p. 2070-2091, https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-4446.12651
  • LUBER, Bruce, FISHER, Carl, APPELBAUM, Paul, PLOESSER, Marcus, LISANBY, Sarah. Non-invasive brain stimulation in the detection of deception:...
  • MAHONEY, Paul. Right to a fair trial in criminal matters under Article 6 ECHR. Judicial Studies Institute Journal, v. 4, n. 2, p. 107-129,...
  • MASSACHUSETTS SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT. Commonwealth v. Gelfgatt, 11 N.E.3d 605, 614-15 (Mass. 2014)
  • MARAS, Marie-Helen. From targeted to mass surveillance: is the EU Data Retention Directive a necessary measure or an unjustified threat to...
  • MITROU, Lilian. The impact of communications data retention on fundamental rights and democracy – the case of the EU Data Retention Directive....
  • OFFICE OF ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION. Report of June 2021. Available at: . Access on March 15, 2022
  • OLBER, Paweł. Remote Search of IT System in Polish Legislation and Its Importance in Fight Against Cybercrime, Internal Security, v. 11, n....
  • OMBUDSMAN OF POLAND. Motion of 4 December 2015 r., II.511.84.2015.KSz
  • PEW RESEARCH CENTER FO INTERNET AND TECHNOLOGY. Mobile Fact Sheet, Pew Research Center for Internet and Technology of February 5, 2018. Available...
  • REGULATION (EU – proposal) of the European Parliament and of the Council on European Production and Preservation Orders for electronic evidence...
  • RANGAVIZ, David. Compelled decryption & state constitutional protection against self-incrimination. American Criminal Law Review, v. 57,...
  • RECHTBANK NOORD-HOLLAND [District Court of North-Holland, the Netherlands]. Judgment of 25 January 2019, NJFS 15/168454-18
  • REDMAYNE, Mike. Rethinking the Privilege Against Self-Incrimination, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, v. 27, no. 2, p. 209–232, 2007 https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gql001
  • ROCHON, Mark, SCHMITT, Andy, HERBERT, Ian. Is It Time to Revisit the Corporate Privilege Against Compelled Self-Incrimination? The Champion,...
  • ROJSZCZAK, Marcin. National Security and Retention of Telecommunications Data in Light of Recent Case Law of the European Courts. European...
  • ROJSZCZAK, Marcin. Ochrona prywatności w cyberprzestrzeni z uwzględnieniem zagrożeń wynikających z nowych technik przetwarzania informacji,...
  • SKRĘTOWICZ, Edward. Z problematyki rzetelnego procesu karnego. In: SKORUPKA, Jerzy (ed.). Rzetelny proces karny. Księga jubileuszowa Profesor...
  • STOYKOVA, Radina, Digital evidence: Unaddressed threats to fairness and the presumption of innocence, Computer Law & Security Review,...
  • ŚLEDZIŃSKA SIMON, Anna. Analiza proporcjonalności ograniczeń konstytucyjnych praw i wolności. Teoria i praktyka, p. 24, 2019. https://doi.org/10.34616/23.19.020
  • TAYLOR, Mark. The EU Data Retention Directive Computer Law & Security Review, v. 22 p. 309-312, 2006. https://doi.org./10.1016/j.clsr.2006.05.005
  • TULEJA, Piotr. Komentarz do art. 31 Konstytucji. In: TULEJA, Piotr (ed.). Konstytucja Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej. Komentarz, Warsaw: Wolters...
  • UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEAL FOR THE ARMED FORCES, United States v. Mitchell H, 76 M.J. 413,424-25 & n.5 (C.A.A.F. 2017)
  • UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, In re Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum Dated March 25, 2011, 670 F.3d 1335, 1349 (11th...
  • UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, United States v. Apple MacPro Computer, 851 F.3d 238, 248 & n.7 (3d Cir. 2017 138...
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO, United States v. Fricosu, 841 F. Supp. 2d 1232, 1237 (D. Colo. 2012)
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN. United States v. Kirschner, 823 F. Supp. 2d 665 (E.D. Mich. 2010)
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, United States v. Spencer, No. 17-cr-00259-CRB-1, 2018 WL 1964588, at...
  • VAINIO, Niklas, MIETTINEN, Samuli. Telecommunications data retention after Digital Rights Ireland: legislative and judicial reactions in the...
  • VERBRUGGEN, Frank; CONINGS, Charlotte. After zigzagging between extremes, finally common sense? Will Belgium return to reasonable rules on...
  • VICTORIAN COURT OF APPEAL, McElroy v The Queen; Wallace v The Queen [2018] VSCA 126, 55 VR 450
  • VITKAUSAS, Dovydas; DIKOV, Grigoriy. Protecting the right to a fair trial under the European Convention on Human Rights. Council of Europe....
  • WILIŃSKI, Paweł. Proces karny w świetle Konstytucji, Warsaw: Wolters Kluwer Polska, p. 174-177, 2011
  • WILIŃSKI, Paweł. Zasada prawa do obrony w polskim procesie karnym, Warsaw: Wolters Kluwer Polska, p. 354-359, 2006
  • WÓJTOWICZ, Krzysztof. Zasada proporcjonalności jako wyznacznik konstytucyjności norm. In: ZUBIK, Marek (ed.). Księga XX-lecia orzecznictwa...
  • ZUBIK, Marek; PODKOWIK, Jan; RYBSKI, Robert. European Constitutional Courts towards Data Retention Laws, Cham: Springer, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57189-4