Coleta de dados de localização no processo penal – Parâmetros europeus (EU e Strasbourg)

This article deals with the problem of collecting, retaining and processing location data for use in criminal proceedings. The collection of location data is an interference with the right to privacy (the Article 8 of the ECHR, the Article 7 of the Charter). However, such interference is permissible if it pursues the aims indicated in Article 8(2) of the ECHR (prevention of and fight against serious crime, protection of general security, national security). Therefore, the question arises as to when the procedural authorities may obtain location data (what offences may justify interference with the right to privacy) and what conditions should be met by national law with regard to this issue.  The ECtHR and the CJEU are increasingly dealing with cases that concern the collection of location data in real time and data retention by telecommunications service providers. This requires an assessment of whether a European standard has now been developed and, if so, what is the standard?Este artigo analisa o problema da coleta, custódia e processamento de dados de localização para uso em processos penais. A coleta de dados de localização é uma restrição ao direito à privacidade (art. 8, CEDH; art. 8, Carta de Direitos Fundamentais da UE). Contudo, isso é permitido se almejar o objetivo indicado no art. 8(2) da CEDH (prevenção e combate a crimes graves, proteção da segurança pública e nacional). Assim, a questão surge sobre quando as autoridades podem obter os dados de localização (quais crimes podem justificar essa restrição à privacidade) e em que condições devem ser respeitadas pelas legislações nacionais sobre o tema. O TEDH e o Tribunal de Justiça da UE estão lidando cada vez mais com casos relacionados à coleta de dados de localização em tempo real e a sua custódia pelos provedores de serviços de telecomunicações. Isso a verificação de se os parâmetros europeus foram desenvolvidos e, em caso positivo, quais são eles

Collection of location data in criminal proceedings – European (the EU and Strasbourg) standards = Coleta de dados de localização no processo penal – Parâmetros europeus (EU e Strasbourg)

- DOI: https://doi.org/10.22197/rbdpp.v7i1.503Analisa o problema da coleta, custódia e processamento de dados de localização para uso em processos penais

The (lack of) consequences of reasonable doubts on the independence of the judiciary system on cooperation in criminal matters in the EU = A (ausência) de consequências em caso de dúvida razoável sobre a independência do sistema judicial na cooperação em matéria penal na União Europeia

Analisa as consequências da violação à independência judicial no caso de cooperação em matéria criminal. Defende que o direito a um juízo independente não é somente um valor fundamental do Estado de Direito, mas também um dos direitos fundamentais. Resume a atual jurisprudência do TJUE relacionada à independência do Judiciário e à imparcialidade dos juízes, examinando ainda a situação na Polônia e os julgamentos recentes do TJUE

The right to a fair trial in criminal cases in the Constitution of the Republic of Poland

Rzeczywisty kształt konstytucyjnie zagwarantowanego prawa do sądu zależy od specyfiki spraw będących przedmiotem danego postępowania. W niniejszym artykule uwzględniając orzecznictwo Trybunału Konstytucyjnego w pierwszej kolejności wskazano, w jaki sposób definiuje się pojęcie „sprawy karnej”. Na tej podstawie ustalono zakres przedmiotowy i podmiotowy prawa do sądu w sprawach karnych, a następnie dokonano analizy jego szczegółowych elementów: prawa dostępu do sądu, prawa do sprawiedliwie ukształtowanej procedury oraz prawa do uzyskania rozstrzygnięcia w rozsądnym terminie. Podkreślono, że w różnym zakresie ono przysługuje pokrzywdzonemu i oskarżonemu w zależności od trybu ścigania przestępstw. Szczególną uwagę poświęcono problematyce prawa do sprawiedliwie ukształtowanej procedury i konieczności zrównoważenia uprawnień uczestników postępowania oraz interesów wymiaru sprawiedliwości. We wnioskach wskazano, że stanowisko Trybunału Konstytucyjnego nie w pełni uwzględnia zmiany zachodzące w prawie karnym, co może prowadzić do faktycznego ograniczenia gwarancji procesowych jednostki wynikających z art. 45 ust. 1 Konstytucji.The Constitutionally guaranteed “right to a fair trial” depends on the specific nature of a case which is taken before a court. The paper analyses the real scope of this one of the fundamental human rights in criminal cases. In the first part of the article the concept of “criminal case” is defined on the basis of jurisprudence of the Constitutional Tribunal. Then the objective and subjective scope of the above mentioned right in criminal cases is laid down and analysed its detailed elements: access to court, the right to a fair proceedings and the right to be heard within a reasonable time. The article also points out that the scope of “the right to a fair trial” is different for the victim and the accused according to the model of prosecution procedure. The specific emphasis is placed on to the right to a fair proceedings and the need to balance procedural rights of the parties and the interests of justice. In conclusion it is emphasised that the Constitutional Tribunal does not fully take into account the changes in the criminal law, which could lead to an actual limitation of the entity’s procedural guarantees under an Article 45 paragraph 1 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland

PRAWO DO ZASKARŻENIA PRZEWLEKŁOŚCI POSTĘPOWANIA I OTRZYMANIA ODPOWIEDNIEJ SUMY PIENIĘŻNEJ

The aim of the article is to identify the causes of defective functioning of the Act on complaints about violation of the right to a hearing without unjustified delay in preparatory proceedings conducted or supervised by a prosecutor and in court proceedings (hereinafter: ACLP). It also examines whether the legislator has adequate measures to implement the recommendations of the ECtHR laid down in the judgment of 7 July 2015 in the case Rutkowski and others v. Poland and make it an effective remedy for the violation of the rights and freedoms in the meaning of the Article 13 ECHR. Leaving aside the assessment of lengthiness of proceedings, the article analyses two issues which are essential for the complainant: accessibility to a complaint about the excessive length of proceedings and the possibility of being awarded an appropriate amount of money laid down in Article 12(4) ACLP. Before the court examines a complaint on its merits, a complainant should know when and on what grounds he can lodge a complaint, and under what conditions he may receive a compensation for excessive length of the proceedings. Due to the fact that the legislator did not lay down the criteria that a court should take into account when hearing a complaint about excessive length of proceedings, it is necessary to examine national case law and find out what factors affect the amount of compensation under Article 12(4) ACLP, and whether these are consistent with the ECtHR case law. In conclusion, it is emphasised that defective functioning of ACLP in the judicial practice mainly results from the inappropriate interpretation of the provisions by courts. An amendment to ACLP can partly help the legislator implement the recommendations of the ECtHR. However, a change in courts’ approach to a complaint about lengthiness of proceedings and consideration of the ECtHR case law are crucial for proper functioning of a complaint about lengthiness of proceedings.Celem artykułu jest ustalenie przyczyn wadliwego funkcjonowania u.s.p.p. oraz zbadanie, czy a jeżeli tak, to jakimi środkami dysponuje ustawodawca, które umożliwią wykonanie zaleceń ETPC wynikających z wyroku z 7 dnia lipca 2015 r. w sprawie Rutkowski i inni p. Polsce i sprawią, że będzie ona skutecznym środkiem ochrony praw i wolności w rozumieniu art. 13 EKPC. Pozostawiając poza zakresem rozważań kryteria oceny przewlekłości postępowania, analizie poddano dwa zagadnienia mające zasadnicze znaczenie z perspektywy skarżącego – kwestię dostępu do omawianego środka zaskarżenia oraz możliwości otrzymania przez niego odpowiedniej sumy pieniężnej określonej w art. 12 ust. 4 u.s.p.p. Zanim skarga zostanie merytorycznie rozpoznana, skarżący musi wiedzieć, kiedy i na jakich zasadach, może on wystąpić z omawianym środkiem zaskarżenia, a także pod jakimi warunkami może otrzymać rekompensatę z tytułu przewlekłości. Z uwagi na fakt, że ustawodawca nie sformułował kryteriów, które powinien wziąć pod uwagę sąd rozpoznający skargę na przewlekłość, analizując orzecznictwo, zbadano, jakie czynniki mają wpływ na wysokość sumy z art. 12 ust. 4 u.s.p.p. i czy są zbieżne z orzecznictwem ETPC. W konkluzji podkreślono, że niewłaściwe funkcjonowanie u.s.p.p. w praktyce wymiaru sprawiedliwości w zasadniczej części jest konsekwencją wadliwej interpretacji przepisów ustawy przez sądy. Ustawodawca poprzez nowelizację u.s.p.p. jedynie częściowo może zrealizować zalecenia ETPC, a decydujące znaczenie dla prawidłowego funkcjonowania skargi na przewlekłość ma zmiana podejścia judykatury do omawianego środka zaskarżenia oraz w większym stopniu uwzględnianie orzecznictwa strasburskiego

Collection of location data in criminal proceedings – European (the EU and Strasbourg) standards

This article deals with the problem of collecting, retaining and processing location data for use in criminal proceedings. The collection of location data is an interference with the right to privacy (the Article 8 of the ECHR, the Article 7 of the Charter). However, such interference is permissible if it pursues the aims indicated in Article 8(2) of the ECHR (prevention of and fight against serious crime, protection of general security, national security). Therefore, the question arises as to when the procedural authorities may obtain location data (what offences may justify interference with the right to privacy) and what conditions should be met by national law with regard to this issue.  The ECtHR and the CJEU are increasingly dealing with cases that concern the collection of location data in real time and data retention by telecommunications service providers. This requires an assessment of whether a European standard has now been developed and, if so, what is the standard?Este artigo analisa o problema da coleta, custódia e processamento de dados de localização para uso em processos penais. A coleta de dados de localização é uma restrição ao direito à privacidade (art. 8, CEDH; art. 8, Carta de Direitos Fundamentais da UE). Contudo, isso é permitido se almejar o objetivo indicado no art. 8(2) da CEDH (prevenção e combate a crimes graves, proteção da segurança pública e nacional). Assim, a questão surge sobre quando as autoridades podem obter os dados de localização (quais crimes podem justificar essa restrição à privacidade) e em que condições devem ser respeitadas pelas legislações nacionais sobre o tema. O TEDH e o Tribunal de Justiça da UE estão lidando cada vez mais com casos relacionados à coleta de dados de localização em tempo real e a sua custódia pelos provedores de serviços de telecomunicações. Isso a verificação de se os parâmetros europeus foram desenvolvidos e, em caso positivo, quais são eles

Pouczenia osoby podejrzanej oraz podejrzanego o uprawnieniach i obowiązkach procesowych po nowelizacji Kodeksu postępowania karnego

SUSPECT’S RIGHT TO INFORMATION AFTER THE AMENDMENTOF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDUREThe article discusses the suspect’s right to information in pre-trial proceedings. Although undoubtedlythe judicial proceeding is the crucial part of a  criminal trial, the importance of the investigative phase cannot be underestimated. This is mainly due to the fact that the Code of Criminal Procedure does not limit the court in basing its judgement on evidence gathered during investigation.For that reason guaranteeing the suspect the right to information at the initial stage of the proceedings is very important from the point of view of effective defence. The authors present and critically assess recent changes in the Code of Criminal Procedure, which entered into force on 1st July 2015 as a  part of far-going amendments maximalising the adversariality of a  criminal trial in Poland. The article aims to establish whether the above-mentioned amendments guarantee that the suspect receives clear, adequate and comprehensive information about his rights and duties in preliminary proceedings. The authors’ evaluation is generally positive. Nonetheless, they identify several important flaws in the amended provisions concerning the adequacy of provided information that should be eliminated.SUSPECT’S RIGHT TO INFORMATION AFTER THE AMENDMENTOF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDUREThe article discusses the suspect’s right to information in pre-trial proceedings. Although undoubtedlythe judicial proceeding is the crucial part of a  criminal trial, the importance of the investigative phase cannot be underestimated. This is mainly due to the fact that the Code of Criminal Procedure does not limit the court in basing its judgement on evidence gathered during investigation.For that reason guaranteeing the suspect the right to information at the initial stage of the proceedings is very important from the point of view of effective defence. The authors present and critically assess recent changes in the Code of Criminal Procedure, which entered into force on 1st July 2015 as a  part of far-going amendments maximalising the adversariality of a  criminal trial in Poland. The article aims to establish whether the above-mentioned amendments guarantee that the suspect receives clear, adequate and comprehensive information about his rights and duties in preliminary proceedings. The authors’ evaluation is generally positive. Nonetheless, they identify several important flaws in the amended provisions concerning the adequacy of provided information that should be eliminated