Translations:Recours au Conseil d État et au Conseil constitutionnel/137/en

• Internal legality
  • The decree lacks of legal basis: it has been written considering the proposals of the Surveillance Law that are against to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, to the 2002/58/CE directive of the 12 July 2008 on the processing of personal data, and against the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights

and Fundamental Freedoms. Hereunder some extracts from the points raised in the complementary observation sent to the Council of State on the 6 May 2016.

• • • Litigious proposals constitute a limitation to the principle of confidentiality, of deletion and anonymization of those data according to European Law;
    • The Intelligence techniques tabled constitute an intrusion in privacy and thus a disproportionate violation in views of rights guaranteed by the article 7 and 8 of the Charter;
    • The absence of a legal framework for the conditions of access of data collected in application of the techniques constitute an disporportionate violation, the opposite of the articles 7, 8 and 52 of the Charter;
    • Excessive and disproportionate nature of the data retention periods is contrary to the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ, October 6, 2015, Maximillian Schrems, C-362/14, § 92);
    • The contested provisions also violate the right to an effective appeal and the right to a fair trial as guaranteed by the Charter;
    • Those concerned with the collection and exploitation of information provided by foreign services have no legal remedy to challenge its validity. This lack of safeguards surrounding the access to data transmitted by foreign service is interfering with the right to an effective appeal and is contrary to the requirements of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights;
    • The obligation for operators to set up an automated data processing is contrary to Directive 2000/31/EC on electronic trade.