the Charter (see, by analogy, in relation to Directive 95/46,
judgments of 20 May 2003, Österreichischer Rundfunk and
Others, C-465/00, C-138/01 and C-139/01, EU:C:2003:294,
paragraph 68; of 13 May 2014, Google Spain and Google,
C-131/12, EU:C:2014:317, paragraph 68, and of 6 October
2015, Schrems, C-362/14, EU:C:2015:650, paragraph 38).
92. In that regard, it must be emphasised that the obligation
imposed on providers of electronic communications services,
by national legislation such as that at issue in the main
proceedings, to retain traffic data in order, when necessary, to
make that data available to the competent national authorities,
raises questions relating to compatibility not only with
Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter, which are expressly referred to
in the questions referred for a preliminary ruling, but also with
the freedom of expression guaranteed in Article 11 of the
Charter (see, by analogy, in relation to Directive 2006/24, the
Digital Rights judgment, paragraphs 25 and 70).
93. Accordingly, the importance both of the right to privacy,
guaranteed in Article 7 of the Charter, and of the right to
protection of personal data, guaranteed in Article 8 of the
Charter, as derived from the Court’s case-law (see, to that
effect, judgment of 6 October 2015, Schrems, C-362/14,
EU:C:2015:650, paragraph 39 and the case-law cited), must
be taken into consideration in interpreting Article 15(1) of
Directive 2002/58. The same is true of the right to freedom of
expression in the light of the particular importance accorded to
that freedom in any democratic society. That fundamental right,
guaranteed in Article 11 of the Charter, constitutes one of the
essential foundations of a pluralist, democratic society, and is
one of the values on which, under Article 2 TEU, the Union is
founded (see, to that effect, judgments of 12 June 2003,
Schmidberger, C-112/00, EU:C:2003:333, paragraph 79, and
of 6 September 2011, Patriciello, C-163/10, EU:C:2011:543,
paragraph 31).
94. In that regard, it must be recalled that, under Article 52(1)
of the Charter, any limitation on the exercise of the rights and
freedoms recognised by the Charter must be provided for by
law and must respect the essence of those rights and freedoms.
With due regard to the principle of proportionality, limitations
may be imposed on the exercise of those rights and freedoms
only if they are necessary and if they genuinely meet objectives
of general interest recognised by the European Union or the
need to protect the rights and freedoms of others (judgment of
15 February 2016, N., C-601/15 PPU, EU:C:2016:84,
paragraph 50).
Page 25