Related Insights

Cybercrime Convention Committee – 2nd Additional Protocol to the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime Discussion Guide

CDT welcomes the opportunity to contribute the observations below in support of the ongoing preparation of a 2nd Additional Protocol to the Budapest Convention. The advance of technology means that law enforcement entities investigating a crime in one county are increasingly seeking data held by a communications service provider in another country. CDT continues to urge that human rights considerations guide cross-border data demands.

Read More

CDT Responds to EC Public Consultation on Tackling Illegal Content Online

In October of last year, the European Commission published its Communication on tackling illegal content online. We criticised it for pushing private companies to police on government’s behalf for content that may be considered harmful or illegal. A few months later, Commission issued a Recommendation doubling down on this approach. The Commission has now conducted a public consultation aiming to ‘gather evidence and data on current practices, respondents’ experiences and organisations’ policies for tackling illegal content online’.

Read More

CDT response to European Commission Consultation on Improving Cross-Border Access to Electronic Evidence in Criminal Matters

We recognise the concerns about difficulties in obtaining electronic data relevant for criminal investigations that motivates the EC’s initiative. Our overriding message is that as the EC considers its next step, it must ensure that protection of fundamental rights is front and centre. We refer to existing human rights principles on necessity and proportionality and ask that they be included in any initiative the EC puts forward.

Read More

Summary of Meeting with the Digital Agenda Intergroup of the European Parliament

On 6 September 2017, the Digital Agenda Intergroup of the European Parliament and CDT held a closed roundtable on removing illegal content online while protecting human rights. This is a summary of the debate held under Chatham House rules. The event focused on challenges to existing intermediary liability limitations, and free expression, from the DSM Copyright Directive Art. 13, as well as the need for consistent and harmonized notice and action procedures across the EU.

Read More

Third party intervention in the Bureau of Investigative Journalism case

On July 8th, CDT submitted a third party intervention (amicus brief) to the European Court of Human Rights in the Bureau of Investigative Journalism and Alice Ross v. United Kingdom case. The journalist applicants challenged the United Kingdom’s Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, Tempora program, and surveillance practices generally. They argued that blanket surveillance had a chilling effect on their profession, and did not satisfy the Court’s standards for compatibility with Articles 8 (privacy) and 10 (freedom of expression) of the European Convention on Human Rights. CDT drew attention to similarities to US surveillance practices, which undoubtedly fail to satisfy the Court’s standards, and argued that the receipt of US intelligence alone makes the UK’s practices incompatible with the Convention.

Read More

CDT & PEN American Center Intervene in Big Brother Watch vs. UK Case

CDT intervened jointly with PEN American Center on the case “Big Brother Watch and others v. the United Kingdom,” arguing that the US’ protections for individual rights in the area of secret surveillance are so weak that the UK violates its obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights when it receives data the NSA obtains through large-scale surveillance programs.

Read More

CDT & PI Third-Party Intervention

Following the 2014 decision of the Court of Justice of the EU to strike down an EU-wide mandatory data retention scheme because it breached privacy rights, the national data retention laws of a number of EU Member States have also come under scrutiny. CDT and Privacy International have now intervened in a case against France to argue that the country’s sweeping data retention requirements violate EU law, as well as the European Convention on Human Rights.

Read More

Written Evidence to the Joint Committee on the Draft Investigatory Powers Bill

Monday, December 21, 2016, CDT submitted comments in response to a call for evidence from the Parliament of the United Kingdom’s Joint Committee on the Draft Investigatory Powers Bill. In our submission, we discuss features of the Draft Investigatory Powers Bill that are clearly incompatible with human rights law as well as technically overbroad, highly intrusive, and potentially dangerous.

Read More