Transborder Access to e-Evidence by Law Enforcement Agencies: A first comparative view on the Commission's Proposal for a Regulation on a European Preservation/Production Order and accompanying Directive

in SSRN (2018)

As communication nowadays commonly takes place via electronic means, the use of electronic evidence (e-evidence) is becoming a crucial element in criminal investigations. Due to the borderless nature of ... [more ▼]

As communication nowadays commonly takes place via electronic means, the use of electronic evidence (e-evidence) is becoming a crucial element in criminal investigations. Due to the borderless nature of the internet, many criminal investigations include a cross-border dimension and therefore, commonly require access to electronic data and evidence that are stored outside the territorial jurisdiction of the investigating authority. Since data are typically held by private companies that are often located in a different country than the investigator, law enforcement authorities (LEAs) are either dependent on the willingness of these service providers to cooperate on a voluntary basis, or to resort to existing legal procedures for obtaining the data for investigations. The relevant procedures under the current framework to access data stored outside the European Union is based on so-called Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties (MLATs), whereas judicial cooperation within the EU is, inter alia, governed by the Directive on the European Investigation Order in the form of the national transposition acts of the Member States. Because e-evidence is, due to its volatile nature, prone to modification and deletion, the timely acquisition of stored data is vital for LEAs. Therefore, informal cooperation between LEAs and private companies is a common method to obtain e-evidence, thereby bypassing the lengthy and often ineffective Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA) mechanisms. Such direct cooperation between law enforcement and private companies, which is commonly carried out on a unilateral basis, has led to a fragmented framework for the acquisition of data. Against this background, the European Commission, on 17 April 2018, proposed new rules on access to e-evidence, to secure and obtain preserved data faster and more effectively and to ensure that all providers that offer services in the EU are subject to the same obligations. Similar developments regarding the adoption of comparable legislative acts and instruments regarding direct law enforcement access to data stored by private companies take place elsewhere in Europe and beyond: The Council of Europe is currently preparing a 2nd Additional Protocol to the Budapest Convention on enhanced international cooperation, whereas in the U.S., the Clarifying Lawful Overseas Use of Data Act on rules for cross-border law enforcement investigations was enacted in March 2018. This contribution will address concerns regarding the role of private companies as ‘extended arm’ of LEAs and the measures that seek to cope with the legal uncertainty and fragmentation that emerged with the informal public-private relationships around the acquisition of e-evidence. The article suggests that the initiatives on different levels might result in even more conflicts of laws than is currently the case, if lacking a coordinated and coherent approach in Europe and internationally. Moreover, the article discusses the impact of the abovementioned developments with regard to EU data protection standards. The compliance of the new rules on access to e-evidence with the EU data protection acquis, namely the GDPR and Directive (EU)2016/680, will be one of the relevant matters covered in this article. [less ▲]

Country Report Luxembourg

in Ukrow, Jörg; Iacino, Gianna; Ory, Stephan (Eds.) et al Comparative Study on Investigative Journalism (2016)

From Digital Rights Ireland and Schrems in Luxembourg to Zakharov and Szabó/Vissy in Strasbourg

in European Data Protection Law Review (2016)

Kontrolle und Aufsicht im Jugendmedienschutz: Einrichtungen und Verfahren nach dem JMStV im Vergleich zum JuSchG – Eine Untersuchung der aktuellen Rechtslage im Blick auf den Novellierungsbedarf

E-print/Working paper (2015)

Regulator Imposes Warning on RTL for Breach of Rules on Protection of Minors over Syrian War Coverage

E-print/Working paper (2015)

New Grand-Ducal Regulation on the film fund for audiovisual production

E-print/Working paper (2015)

Allgemeine Grundsätze

Book published by Rehm (2015)

New Grand-Ducal Regulation on fees for audio and audiovisual media service providers

E-print/Working paper (2015)

Rundfunkstaatsvertrag/Jugendmedienschutzstaatsvertrag – Heidelberger Kommentar

Book published by Rehm (2015)

Das EuGH-Urteil zur Vorratsdatenspeicherung und seine Folgen, Auswirkungen des Urteils auf Mitgliedstaaten, EU-Rechtsakte und internationale Abkommen

in Zeitschrift für Datenschutz (2014), 2014(11), 553-557