CENTRUM FÖR RÄTTVISA v. SWEDEN JUDGMENT
authorisation was given by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.
However, it noted that despite the existence of judicial authorisation, the
lack of independent oversight of the conditions and limitations set by the
court was problematic.
88. Similarly, the Commission observed that notification of the subject
of surveillance was not an absolute requirement of Article 8 of the
Convention, since a general complaints procedure to an independent
oversight body could compensate for non-notification.
89. The report also considered internal controls to be a “primary
safeguard”. Recruitment and training were key issues; in addition, it was
important for the agencies to build in respect for privacy and other human
rights when promulgating internal rules.
90. The report also considered the position of journalists. It accepted that
they were a group which required special protection, since searching their
contacts could reveal their sources (and the risk of discovery could be a
powerful disincentive to whistle-blowers). Nevertheless, it considered there
to be no absolute prohibition on searching the contacts of journalists,
provided that there were very strong reasons for doing so. It acknowledged,
however, that the journalistic profession was not one which was easily
identified, since NGOs were also engaged in building public opinion and
even bloggers could claim to be entitled to equivalent protections.
91. Finally, the report considered briefly the issue of intelligence
sharing, and in particular the risk that States could thereby circumvent
stronger domestic surveillance procedures or any legal limits which their
agencies might be subject to as regards domestic intelligence operations. It
considered that a suitable safeguard would be to provide that the bulk
material transferred could only be searched if all the material requirements
of a national search were fulfilled and this was duly authorised in the same
way as a search of bulk material obtained by the signals intelligence agency
using its own techniques.
III. EUROPEAN UNION LAW
A. Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union
92. Articles 7, 8 and 11 of the Charter provide as follows:
Article 7 – Respect for private and family life
“Everyone has the right to respect for his or her private and family life, home and
communications.”
Article 8 – Protection of personal data
“1. Everyone has the right to the protection of personal data concerning him or her.
25