Top

Hint

Swipe to navigate through the chapters of this book

Published in:

Read chapter Read first chapter

2022 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

The EU and Access to Electronic Evidence: Privatisation of Law Enforcement?

Author : Tatiana Tropina

Published in: Cybersecurity Policy in the EU and South Korea from Consultation to Action

Publisher: Springer International Publishing

Abstract

The inability of the mutual legal assistance frameworks to meet the growing demand for cross-border access to electronic evidence has led to various legislative proposals that suggest replacing mutual legal assistance with direct requests to communication service providers located abroad. These solutions include the US CLOUD Act, the EU E-Evidence Proposals, and the Second Additional Protocol to the Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime. This chapter discusses the challenges of current regimes governing access to electronic evidence stored with providers abroad and analyses the new legislative frameworks relevant to the EU and their possible effects. The author argues that replacing traditional mutual legal assistance mechanisms with direct requests to providers can lead to privatisation of law enforcement and, ultimately, have a severe effect on the protection of fundamental rights in the EU and beyond.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

previous chapter Enhancing Cooperation Between South Korea and the EU in the Fight Against Cybercrime

next chapter Recent Trends in UN Cybersecurity Governance and South Korea-EU Cooperation

The author would like to sincerely thank Gertjan Boulet and Michael Reiterer for their valuable feedback on the draft of this chapter and their tireless efforts to make this book a success.

Sergio Carrera, Marco Stefan and Valsamis Mitsilegas, “Cross-border data access in criminal proceedings and the future of digital justice”, (2020), 1, https://www.ceps.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/TFR-Cross-Border-Data-Access.pdf

European Commission, “Commission staff working document. Impact assessment”, April 17, 2018, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52018SC0118&from=EN

European Parliament, “An assessment of the Commission’s proposals on electronic evidence”, (2018), 21-22, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2018/604989/IPOL_STU(2018)604989_EN.pdf; Els De Busser, “The Digital Unfitness of Mutual Legal Assistance,” Security and Human Rights, no. 1 (2017).

Carrera, Stefan and Mitsilegas, ii

See: European Union, “EU in Brief. Values”, https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/eu-in-brief_en

US Cloud Act, https://www.justice.gov/dag/page/file/1152896/download; European Commission, “Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down harmonised rules on the appointment of legal representatives for the purpose of gathering evidence in criminal proceedings”, (2017), https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM%3A2018%3A226%3AFIN , European Commission, “Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on European Production and Preservation Orders for electronic evidence in criminal matters”, 2018, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM%3A2018%3A225%3AFIN ; Cybercrime Convention Committee (T-CY), “(Draft) Second Additional Protocol to the Convention on Cybercrime on enhanced co-operation and disclosure of electronic evidence as approved by the T-CY at its 24th Plenary”, May, 28, 2021, https://rm.coe.int/0900001680a42c4b

As this chapter refers to the EU Directives and Regulations, it is important to highlight the difference between these legislative acts. The EU Directives set the goals that must be achieved by the member states, but each member state decides how to transpose them into their national laws. The EU Regulations are binding acts and apply in their entirety to each of the EU member state.

European Union, “Directive 2014/41/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 April 2014 regarding the European Investigation Order in criminal matters”, (2014), https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32014L0041

See: European Union, “Agreement with the United States on mutual legal assistance”, July 19, 2003, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM%3Ajl0052

European Union, “Framework Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, on the one part, and the Republic of Korea, on the other part”, January 23, 2013, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A22013A0123%2801%29

See e.g. European Commission, “Commission staff working document. Impact assessment”, April 17, 2018; Gail Kent, “The Mutual Legal Assistance Problem Explained”, (2015), http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2015/02/ mutual-legal-assistance-problem-explained; Andrew K. Woods, “Data Beyond Borders: Mutual Legal Assistance in the Internet Era”, January 27, 2015, https://uknowledge.uky.edu/law_facpub/518/

De Busser, The Digital Unfitness.

European Union, Directive 2014/41/EU, Art. 12

European Union, Directive 2014/41/EU, Art.32

European Commission, Commission staff working document

Jennifer Daskal. “A New UK-US Data Sharing Agreement: A Tremendous Opportunity, If Done Right”, (2016), https://www.justsecurity.org/29203/british-searches-america-tremendous-opportunity/

Stanislaw Tosza, “Cross-Border Gathering of Electronic Evidence : Mutual Legal Assistance, Its Shortcomings and Remedies”, Société numérique et droit pénal, edited by Daniel Flore and Vanessa Franssen, (Bruylant: 2019), 269

Mirko Hohmann and Sophie Barnett. “System Upgrade. Improving Cross-Border Access to Electronic Evidence”, January 21, 2019, https://www.gppi.net/2019/01/21/system-upgrade

Marco Stefan and Gloria González Fuster, “Cross-border Access to Electronic Data through Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters State of the art and latest developments in the EU and the US”, December 3, 2018, https://www.ceps.eu/ceps-publications/cross-border-access-electronic-data-through-judicial-cooperation-criminal-matters/

Piotr Bąkowski and Sofija Voronova, “Electronic evidence in criminal matters. Briefing. EU Legislation in Progress”, (March 2021), 3, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2021/690522/EPRS_BRI(2021)690522_EN.pdf; see also SIRIUS Project, “EU Digital Evidence Situation Report. 2nd Annual Report”, December 1, 2020, 22, https://www.europol.europa.eu/publications-documents/sirius-eu-digital-evidence-situation-report-2nd-annual-report

SIRIUS Project, 15

European Commission, Commission staff working document, 15-16.

Sergi Vazquez Maymir. “Anchoring the need to revise cross-border access to e-evidence”, Internet Policy Review 9 (3), (2020), 7.

Paul de Hert, Cihan Parlar and Johannes Thumfart. “Legal Arguments Used in Courts Regarding Territoriality and Cross-Border Production Orders: From Yahoo Belgium to Microsoft Ireland”, New Journal of European Criminal Law 9, no. 3 (September 2018), 18-20.

SIRIUS Project, 16

European Commission, “Questionnaire on improving criminal justice in cyberspace Summary of Responses”, (n/d), 2, https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/default/files/e-library/documents/policies/organized-crime-and-human-trafficking/e-evidence/docs/summary_of_replies_to_e-evidence_questionnaire_en.pdf

Ibid

Jennifer Daskal, “Microsoft Ireland, the CLOUD Act, and International Lawmaking 2.0”, Stanford Law Review Online, Vol. 71, (2018).

Hert, Parlar and Thumfart, 20

See: United States v. Microsoft Corp., 584 US ___ (2018), https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/584/17-2/

US Cloud Act

Katitza Rodriguez, “The US CLOUD Act and the EU: A Privacy Protection Race to the Bottom”, April 9, 2018, https://www.eff.org/fr/deeplinks/2018/04/us-cloud-act-and-eu-privacy-protection-race-bottom ; Lawrence Siry, “Cloudy Days Ahead: Cross-Border Evidence Collection and Its Impact on the Rights of EU Citizens”, New Journal of European Criminal Law 10, no. 3 (September 2019): 227–50.

Emmanuelle Mignon, “The CLOUD Act : Unveiling European Powerlessness”, September 5, 2020, https://legrandcontinent.eu/fr/2020/09/05/the-cloud-act-unveiling-european-powerlessness/ ; Marcin Rojszczak, “CLOUD act agreements from an EU perspective”, Computer Law & Security Review, Volume 38, (2020).

EDPB, “Guidelines 2/2018 on derogations of Article 49 under Regulation 2016/679”, (2018), 5, https://edpb.europa.eu/ourwork-tools/our-documents/guidelines/guidelines-22018-derogations-article-49-under-regulation_en

European Commission, “Criminal justice: Joint statement on the launch of EU-US negotiations to facilitate access to electronic evidence”, September, 26, 2019, https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/STATEMENT_19_5890

European Commission, “Recommendation for a Council Decision authorising the opening of negotiations in view of an agreement between the European Union and the United States of America on cross-border access to electronic evidence for judicial cooperation in criminal matters”, February 5, 2019, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52019PC0070

EDPB, “Annex. Initial legal assessment of the impact of the US CLOUD Act on the EU legal framework for the protection of personal data and the negotiations of an EU-US Agreement on cross-border access to electronic evidence”, (2019), 10, https://edpb.europa.eu/sites/default/files/files/file2/edpb_edps_joint_response_us_cloudact_annex.pdf

Thomas Wahl, “E-Evidence: Start of Negotiations on EU-US Agreement”, January 12, 2020, https://eucrim.eu/news/e-evidence-start-negotiations-eu-us-agreement/

Theodore Christakis and Fabien Terpan, “EU-US Negotiations on Law Enforcement Access to Data: Divergences, Challenges and EU Law Procedures and Options”, International Data Privacy Law, 11 (2), (2021), 1

European Commission, “Recommendation for a Council Decision”.

European Commission, “Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on European Production and Preservation Orders for electronic evidence in criminal matters”, April 17, 2018, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM%3A2018%3A225%3AFIN

European Commission, “Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down harmonised rules on the appointment of legal representatives for the purpose of gathering evidence in criminal proceedings”, April 17, 2018, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM%3A2018%3A226%3AFIN

De Busser, The Digital Unfitness, 174-175; Carrera, Stefan and Mitsilegas, I; EuroISPA, “Proposal for a Regulation on European Production and Preservation Orders for Electronic Evidence in Criminal Matters”, (June 2018), https://rm.coe.int/ws1-1806-euroispa-e-evidence/16808c29c0 ; Meijers Committee, “Comments on the proposal for a regulation on European Production and Preservation Orders for electronic evidence in criminal matters”, July 18, 2018, https://www.commissie-meijers.nl/comment/comments-on-the-proposal-for-a-regulation-on-european-production-and-preservation-orders-for-electronic-evidence-in-criminal-matters/

EDRi, “EU ‘e-evidence’ proposals turn service providers into judicial authorities”, April 17, 2018,

https://edri.org/our-work/eu-e-evidence-proposals-turn-service-providers-into-judicial-authorities /

Valsamis Mitsilegas, “The Privatisation of Mutual Trust in Europe’s Area of Criminal Justice: The Case of e-Evidence”, Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law 25, no. 3 (June 2018), 265

European Parliament, “Report on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down harmonised rules on the appointment of legal representatives for the purpose of gathering evidence in criminal proceedings”, December 11, 2020, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-9-2020-0256_EN.html

Council of Europe, Cybercrime: Council of Europe strengthens its legal arsenal Ref. DC 207(2021), November, 17, 2021, https://search.coe.int/directorate_of_communications/Pages/result_details.aspx?ObjectId=0900001680a48ca6

EFF, “Joint Civil Society Response to Discussion Guide on a 2nd Additional Protocol to the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime”, June 28, 2018, https://www.eff.org/document/joint-civil-society-response-discussion-guide-2nd-additional-protocol-budapest-convention

Even though South Korea is not a party to the Budapest Convention, efforts have been made to join the treaty. For more discussion on this topic, please see the chapter of Gibum Kim.

Bąkowski, Piotr and Voronova, Sofija. “Electronic evidence in criminal matters. Briefing. EU Legislation in Progress”. (March 2021). https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2021/690522/EPRS_BRI(2021)690522_EN.pdf

Carrera, Sergio, Stefan, Marco and Mitsilegas, Valsamis. “Cross-border data access in criminal proceedings and the future of digital justice”. (2020). https://www.ceps.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/TFR-Cross-Border-Data-Access.pdf

Christakis, Theodore and Terpan, Fabien. “EU-US Negotiations on Law Enforcement Access to Data: Divergences, Challenges and EU Law Procedures and Options”. International Data Privacy Law, 11 (2), (2021): 81-106. CrossRef

Council of Europe, Cybercrime: Council of Europe strengthens its legal arsenal Ref. DC (2021), November, 17, 2021, https://search.coe.int/directorate_of_communications/Pages/result_details.aspx?ObjectId=0900001680a48ca6

Daskal, Jennifer. “A New UK-US Data Sharing Agreement: A Tremendous Opportunity, If Done Right”. (2016). https://www.justsecurity.org/29203/british-searches-america-tremendous-opportunity/

Daskal, Jennifer. “Microsoft Ireland, the CLOUD Act, and International Lawmaking 2.0”. Stanford Law Review Online, Vol. 71. (2018 )

De Busser, Els. “The Digital Unfitness of Mutual Legal Assistance”. Security and Human Rights 28, no. 1 (2017): 161-179

de Hert, Paul, Parlar, Cihan and Thumfart, Johannes. “Legal Arguments Used in Courts Regarding Territoriality and Cross-Border Production Orders: From Yahoo Belgium to Microsoft Ireland.” New Journal of European Criminal Law 9, no. 3 (September 2018 ): 326-352.

EDPB. “Annex. Initial legal assessment of the impact of the US CLOUD Act on the EU legal framework for the protection of personal data and the negotiations of an EU-US Agreement on cross-border access to electronic evidence”. (2019). https://edpb.europa.eu/sites/default/files/files/file2/edpb_edps_joint_response_us_cloudact_annex.pdf

EDPB. “Guidelines 2/2018 on derogations of Article 49 under Regulation 2016/679”. (2018). https://edpb.europa.eu/ourwork-tools/our-documents/guidelines/guidelines-22018-derogations-article-49-under-regulation_en

EDRi. “EU ‘e-evidence’ proposals turn service providers into judicial authorities”. April 17, 2018, https://edri.org/our-work/eu-e-evidence-proposals-turn-service-providers-into-judicial-authorities/

EFF. “Joint Civil Society Response to Discussion Guide on a 2nd Additional Protocol to the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime”. June 28, 2018. https://www.eff.org/document/joint-civil-society-response-discussion-guide-2nd-additional-protocol-budapest-convention

EuroISPA. “Proposal for a Regulation on European Production and Preservation Orders for Electronic Evidence in Criminal Matters”, (June 2018), https://rm.coe.int/ws1-1806-euroispa-e-evidence/16808c29c0

European Commission, “Commission staff working document. Impact assessment”. April 17, 2018a. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52018SC0118&from=EN

European Commission. “Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down harmonised rules on the appointment of legal representatives for the purpose of gathering evidence in criminal proceedings”. April 17, 2018b. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM%3A2018%3A226%3AFIN

European Commission. “Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on European Production and Preservation Orders for electronic evidence in criminal matters”. April 17, 2018c. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM%3A2018%3A225%3AFIN

European Commission. “Questionnaire on improving criminal justice in cyberspace Summary of Responses” (n.d.) https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/default/files/e-library/documents/policies/organized-crime-and-human-trafficking/e-evidence/docs/summary_of_replies_to_e-evidence_questionnaire_en.pdf

European Commission. “Recommendation for a Council Decision authorising the opening of negotiations in view of an agreement between the European Union and the United States of America on cross-border access to electronic evidence for judicial cooperation in criminal matters”. February 5, 2019a. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52019PC0070

European Commission. Criminal justice: Joint statement on the launch of EU-US negotiations to facilitate access to electronic evidence. September, 26, 2019b. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/STATEMENT_19_5890

European Parliament. “Report on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down harmonised rules on the appointment of legal representatives for the purpose of gathering evidence in criminal proceedings”. December 11, 2020. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-9-2020-0256_EN.html

European Union. “Agreement with the United States on mutual legal assistance”. July 19, 2003. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM%3Ajl0052

European Union. “Directive 2014/41/EU Regarding the European Investigation Order in criminal matters”. (2014). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32014L0041

European Union. “EU in Brief. Values”. (n.d.). https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/eu-in-brief_en

European Union. “Framework Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, on the one part, and the Republic of Korea, on the other part”. January, 23, 2013. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A22013A0123%2801%29

Hohmann, Mirko and Barnett, Sophie. “System Upgrade. Improving Cross-Border Access to Electronic Evidence”. January 21, 2019. https://www.gppi.net/2019/01/21/system-upgrade

Kent, Gail. “The Mutual Legal Assistance Problem Explained”. (2015). http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2015/02/mutual-legal-assistance-problem-explained

Meijers Committee. “Comments on the proposal for a regulation on European Production and Preservation Orders for electronic evidence in criminal matters”. July 18, 2018. https://www.commissie-meijers.nl/comment/comments-on-the-proposal-for-a-regulation-on-european-production-and-preservation-orders-for-electronic-evidence-in-criminal-matters/

Mignon, Emmanuelle. “The CLOUD Act: Unveiling European Powerlessness. September, 5, 2020. https://legrandcontinent.eu/fr/2020/09/05/the-cloud-act-unveiling-european-powerlessness/

Mitsilegas, Valsamis. “The Privatisation of Mutual Trust in Europe’s Area of Criminal Justice: The Case of e-Evidence”. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law 25, no. 3 (June 2018 ): 263–65.

Rodriguez, Katitza. “The US CLOUD Act and the EU: A Privacy Protection Race to the Bottom”. April 9, 2018. https://www.eff.org/fr/deeplinks/2018/04/us-cloud-act-and-eu-privacy-protection-race-bottom

Rojszczak, Marcin. “CLOUD act agreements from an EU perspective”. Computer Law & Security Review, Volume 38, (2020 ).

SIRIUS Project. “EU Digital Evidence Situation Report. 2nd Annual Report”. December 1, 2020, https://www.europol.europa.eu/publications-documents/sirius-eu-digital-evidence-situation-report-2nd-annual-report

Siry, Lawrence. “Cloudy Days Ahead: Cross-Border Evidence Collection and Its Impact on the Rights of EU Citizens.” New Journal of European Criminal Law 10, no. 3 (September 2019): 227–50.

Stefan, Marco and González Fuster, Gloria. “Cross-border Access to Electronic Data through Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters State of the art and latest developments in the EU and the US”. December 3, 2018. https://www.ceps.eu/ceps-publications/cross-border-access-electronic-data-through-judicial-cooperation-criminal-matters/

Tosza, Stanislaw. “Cross-Border Gathering of Electronic Evidence : Mutual Legal Assistance, Its Shortcomings and Remedies”. In Société numérique et droit pénal, edited by Daniel Flore and Vanessa Franssen. (Bruylant: 2019): 269-285.

United States v. Microsoft Corp., 584 US ___ (2018). https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/584/17-2/

US Cloud Act. https://www.justice.gov/dag/page/file/1152896/download

Vazquez Maymir, Sergi. "Anchoring the need to revise cross-border access to e-evidence", Internet Policy Review 9 (3), (2020 ). https://doi.org/10.14763/2020.3.1495

Wahl, Thomas. “E-Evidence: Start of Negotiations on EU-US Agreement”. January 12, 2020. https://eucrim.eu/news/e-evidence-start-negotiations-eu-us-agreement/

Woods, Andrew K. “Data Beyond Borders: Mutual Legal Assistance in the Internet Era”. January 27, 2015. https://uknowledge.uky.edu/law_facpub/518/

Title: The EU and Access to Electronic Evidence: Privatisation of Law Enforcement?
Author: Tatiana Tropina
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Book: Cybersecurity Policy in the EU and South Korea from Consultation to Action
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-08383-9

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-031-08384-6

Copyright Year: 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08384-6_11

Springer Professional

Hint

Swipe to navigate through the chapters of this book

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Premium Partner