BIG BROTHER WATCH AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM JUDGMENT
97
Recognising the need for co-operation between States and private industry in
combating cybercrime and the need to protect legitimate interests in the use and
development of information technologies;
Believing that an effective fight against cybercrime requires increased, rapid and
well-functioning international co-operation in criminal matters;
Convinced that the present Convention is necessary to deter action directed against
the confidentiality, integrity and availability of computer systems, networks and
computer data as well as the misuse of such systems, networks and data by providing
for the criminalisation of such conduct, as described in this Convention, and the
adoption of powers sufficient for effectively combating such criminal offences, by
facilitating their detection, investigation and prosecution at both the domestic and
international levels and by providing arrangements for fast and reliable international
co-operation;
Mindful of the need to ensure a proper balance between the interests of law
enforcement and respect for fundamental human rights as enshrined in the 1950
Council of Europe Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental
Freedoms, the 1966 United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights and other applicable international human rights treaties, which reaffirm the
right of everyone to hold opinions without interference, as well as the right to freedom
of expression, including the freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and
ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, and the rights concerning the respect for
privacy;
Mindful also of the right to the protection of personal data, as conferred, for
example, by the 1981 Council of Europe Convention for the Protection of Individuals
with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data;
...
Article 2 – Illegal access
“Each Party shall adopt such legislative and other measures as may be necessary to
establish as criminal offences under its domestic law, when committed intentionally,
the access to the whole or any part of a computer system without right. A Party may
require that the offence be committed by infringing security measures, with the intent
of obtaining computer data or other dishonest intent, or in relation to a computer
system that is connected to another computer system.”
Article 3 – Illegal interception
“Each Party shall adopt such legislative and other measures as may be necessary to
establish as criminal offences under its domestic law, when committed intentionally,
the interception without right, made by technical means, of non-public transmissions
of computer data to, from or within a computer system, including electromagnetic
emissions from a computer system carrying such computer data. A Party may require
that the offence be committed with dishonest intent, or in relation to a computer
system that is connected to another computer system.”
Article 4 – Data interference
“1. Each Party shall adopt such legislative and other measures as may be necessary
to establish as criminal offences under its domestic law, when committed
intentionally, the damaging, deletion, deterioration, alteration or suppression of
computer data without right.