CENTRUM FÖR RÄTTVISA v. SWEDEN JUDGMENT – SEPARATE OPINIONS
JOINT CONCURRING OPINION OF JUDGES LEMMENS,
VEHABOVIĆ AND BOŠNJAK
In this case, we voted with the majority on all counts of the operative
part. As in the connected case of Big Brother Watch and Others v. the
United Kingdom (applications nos. 58170/13, 62322/14 and 24969/15) we
consider that the judgment should go considerably further in upholding the
importance of the protection of private life and correspondence, in particular
by introducing stricter minimum safeguards, but also by applying those
safeguards more rigorously to the impugned bulk interception regime. The
arguments advanced in our concurring opinion in that case are largely
applicable in this case too. In order to avoid unnecessary repetition, we refer
the reader to that separate opinion. In so far as certain passages are not
pertinent to the present case due to differences in the regulatory frameworks
of the two bulk interception regimes, the reader should simply disregard
them as irrelevant.
97