European Human Rights Court Rules Mass Surveillance Illegal (theregister.co.uk)
Kekke sends this report from El Reg:
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has ruled that mass surveillance is illegal, in a little-noticed case in Hungary. In a judgment last week, the court ruled that the Hungarian government had violated article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the right to privacy) due to its failure to include "sufficiently precise, effective and comprehensive" measures that would limit surveillance to only people it suspected of crimes. Under a section of the 2011 National Security Act, a minister of the government is able to approve a police request to search people's houses, mail, phones and laptops if they are seeking to protect national security. ... The court said the Hungarian government should be required to interpret the law in a narrow fashion and "verify whether sufficient reasons for intercepting a specific individual's communications exist in each case." Or in other words, every individual case must be looked at carefully and a decision made on each. Which is clearly impossible if the law is taken to carry out mass surveillance, i.e., hoovering up information over the internet and then searching in it."
Europe has a big problem with its citizens joining terror groups like ISIS. Why are they taking steps like this that only help ISIS? The terrorists are homegrown in many of the ISIS attacks making them particularly hard to detect. Mass surveillance is really the only way to detect them and keep us all safe.
God babysits spiders.
"hoovering up information over the internet and then searching in it" You mean there are other options?
Look inside everyone's mail. If there's anything suspicious, there's your probable cause. If there's nothing suspicious, no harm done -- but best to keep the info in case it contained a coded message. This message brought to you by the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
Much of the EU has its own deep dark history with German Nazi occupied Europe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/..., Soviet occupation, decades of NSA, CIA and GCHQ operations.
Mass surveillance was used on a lot of the different nations and individuals for different party, political or trade reasons.
Legal teams can draw on the past generational experiences under fascist, communist and now EU/US/NATO rule and tell the press about what they found.
Recall the vaults filled with audio tape opened in the 1990's. The vast amounts of files the East Germans collected and then tried to destroy. The German legal views on opening East German files re East or West German collected content. Now the NSA whistleblowers.
Looks like the EU just found out about the wisdom of the US 4th amendment to be secure in their persons, houses, papers vs big government or a politico-economic union tyranny.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
...will they ever root out terrorists before terrorists strike? Such a law will lead to another Charlie Hibdo attack!!
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
That's cute.
Sincerely,
The NSA.
Except of course for all those cameras surveilling every public inch of major cities, because that's "public space" and you still have the option to self-impose house arrest to avoid it.
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
You're doing the same thing.
The ECHR ruled over a decade ago that even prisoners have a right to vote. The UK replied 'we'll get right on it' and promptly did nothing at all. We've been in violation of their ruling for all that time, and there's nothing they can do. Our prime minister even openly brags that we are ignoring the ruling*. This will be no different. The ECHR doesn't actually have an effective enforcement mechanism, should a member state choose to ignore them.
*http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20053244
Sweden has turned into the land of the Shrew, and the home of .. no, not Dave but Muhammed.
They are going to need a ruling on mass rape long before the mass surveillance is going to matter.