Bulgaria's Constitutional Court Rules Bulk Data Retention Unconstitutional; EU Says No New Snooping Directive Coming

from the surprising-but-welcome-victory dept

Just last week we reported that a Dutch court had set aside the country's national data retention law; now Bulgarian judges have done the same:

Bulgaria's Constitutional Court ruled on March 12 to declare provisions in the Electronic Communications Act mandating the bulk collection of telecommunications data as unconstitutional.
The challenge to the national law came soon after the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) had ruled that the European data retention directive was "invalid". The assumption has always been that the European Commission would put together a revised version of the directive to deal with the court's objections, but in a surprise move, the EU Commissioner responsible announced that no new snooping law would be proposed:
"On the data retention directive, the European Commission does not plan to present a new legislative initiative," Dimitris Avramopoulos told a news conference in Brussels.
It's worth emphasizing that this does not mean bulk data retention is dead in the EU. As an earlier Techdirt post explained, the EU's Member States can still bring in national laws requiring data retention, but those can be challenged in the courts in the light of the CJEU decision, as is already happening. In practice, this means that there is likely to be a wide range of requirements for data retention across Europe, ranging from the most extreme in the UK, for example, to those countries that accept that such mass surveillance is not just intrusive but also ineffectual.

Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and +glynmoody on Google+

Filed Under: bulgaria, data retention, eu, privacy


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 17 Mar 2015 @ 1:57am

    FBI's Comey came to its neighbor Romania recently and told the president and the new local "NSA" chief there that they NEED a data retention law if they want to collaborate well with US in the future.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 17 Mar 2015 @ 3:26am

    Chilling effect

    "mass surveillance is not just intrusive but also ineffectual."

    Ineffectual for it's usual stated purpose, that is. Still useful for it's real purpose of creating a chilling effect on the sheeple.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Padpaw (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 6:17am

    now to just wait for the EU to get caught spying after they promised not to

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Michael, 17 Mar 2015 @ 6:53am

    Bulgaria - land of the free and the home of the brave.

    How'd that happen?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    MondoGordo (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 9:10am

    "no new snooping law"

    How about a "new no-snooping law" ? That'd be much better!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 17 Mar 2015 @ 10:17am

    I envy EU states. They actually appear to follow their constitutional laws. Which is more than I can say for the lawlessness happening in the United States.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 17 Mar 2015 @ 7:51pm

      Re:

      The US government says that the US constitution means whatever the US government says it means. What kind of accountability is that? None.

      The Constitution should be interpreted by the people and those in government held accountable to *that* interpretation, not the government's own.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Pragmatic, 18 Mar 2015 @ 3:27am

        Re: Re:

        Which means actually getting involved in the democratic process and holding the government to accountable, i.e. getting on first name terms with your Congresscritter. What actually happens is we outsource democracy to these people, leave them to get on with it, complain about it when they get it wrong (but not to them personally), then vote them in again because we don't like the other party.

        Better to hold these people to account personally. Keep their feet to the fire and make them afraid of losing their jobs if you want to see change.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.