Oct. 6, 2020

Thesaurus : 05. CJCE - CJUE

Full reference: CJEU, Grand Chamber, 6th of October 2020, Privacy International c/ Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, C-623/17.

Read the judgment 

Read the summary of the judgment (in French)

Read the opinion of the Advocate General 

Read the reference for a preliminary ruling from the Investigatory Powers Tribunal - London (United Kingdom)

Aug. 21, 2020

Publications : Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

Full reference: Frison-Roche, M.-A., Being obliged by Law to unlock telephone is not equivalent to self-incrimination: Cour de cassation, Criminal Chamber, Dec. 19, 2019Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation, 21st of August 2020

Read by freely subscribing the other news of the Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

To go further, read Marie-Anne Frison-Roche's working paper: Rethinking the world from the notion of data

 

Summary of the news

Because Compliance Law is about Information, the tendency is to legally favorise technology of captation of information on people rather than technology of secret, which blocks transmission of information.

But Secret is also the expression of freedom and the protection of humans, which is the "Monumental Goal" of Compliance Law itself ! This is why it is so difficult to balance between Information and Secret in Compliance Law, and why Internet's Governance is so delicate.

The French Cour de Cassation (French Judicial Supreme Court) has released a decision on December 19, 2020, about a case of refusal to unlock mobile-phone. The police had found an individual with some drugs (cannabis in a car), a lot of cash and three locked mobile-phones. By application of the article 432-15-2 of the Code pénal (French Criminal Code ), they had asked him to give them the unlock code. This person had refused to do so. He was condemned not for drug dealing, but for refusal of unlock code communication.

The court separates the code communication and the information that the code allows to reach. 

The solution is double and symmetrical :

  • if "the - searched - data cannot be obtained independently of the suspect's will", it is not possible to constrain the person without violating his/her procedural rights ;
  • if the data can be obtained independently of the suspect's will (that is concretely "the case of the data contained in the telephone, which can be obtained by technical means"), the captation is legally possible without the person's consent and his/her obstruction can be legally and autonomously punished by a criminal sanction ;

The concern of Information leads Compliance Law to always more segmentation of Information...

Financial Market has given the model of the efficiency of Information segmentation. 

Now, Data Law follows.

July 13, 2016

Blog

Par sa décision du Conseil d’État, BFM TV, .!footnote-562, Le Conseil d'Etat laisse le Régulateur - ici le CSA - décider selon son propre objectif - ici l'intérêt général et la mise en balance des risques, en visant le Droit de l'Union de l'Union communautaire qui n'a pas à en être contrarié.

En effet, le 17 décembre 2015, le CSA a agréé la décision de la chaîne LCI à ne plus faire payer l'accès à ses programmes.

Ce passage 'en clair" a été agréé d'une façon non ouverte alors que les textes communautaires visent avant tout le principe de concurrence et sont hiérarchiquement supérieurs au droit français qui organise la régulation du secteur.

On comprend donc que les concurrents de LCI, BFM TV et NextRadio TV aient attaqué cette décision devant le Conseil d’État, en demandant purement et simplement que l'autorisation d'émettre soit retirée à LCI en raison de sa décision de passer à la gratuité. Leurs requête sera pourtant rejetée, et cela par une forte motivation, qui s'appuie justement sur le Droit de l'Union européenne, son esprit et les relations entre l'Europe et le Droit français.

 

Lire ci-dessous.

1

Référence complète : CE, 13 juillet 2016, Société BFM TV et NextRadio TV, n° 395824 et 399098

Aug. 5, 2014

Blog

Political power has often difficulties, or takes a long time to admit the principles of law, such as express the judges.

So it was quite certain that the penalty proceedings held before the Autorité de Régulation des Communications Electroniques et de la Poste -ARCEP  (French Regulatory Authority for Electronic Communications and Post, as the investigation body and the judgment body were not sufficiently distinct crumpled the constitutional principle of impartiality.

It was acquired about 15 years. Yet the organization has continued.

It has been enough that an operator has been sanctioned. He used the procedure of Question Prioritairre de Constitutionnalité -Q.P.C.  Priority Question of Constitutionality) and Numéricable July 5, 2013 decision by the Constitutional Council came to declare that any sanction proceedings before ARCEP unconstitutional, because of objective procedural partialité, thus causing difficulty to the regulator.

It took until the 0rdonnance of March 12, 2014 and finally the decree of 1st August 2014 to organize an efficient sanctions procedure, making this time an intern wall within the ARCEP between the services responsible for the instruction and those which are responsible for judging.

The great judge Pierre Drai used to say: "Ne pas respecter le droit coûte cher (Do not respect the law is expensive)".

We see here that this is true also for the Government which writes laws and regulations. So, for months, the regulator has been without power, to the delight of the operators, who often are tacticians or turbulent.

Aug. 1, 2014

Thesaurus : 03. Décrets, réglements et arrêtés

July 27, 2014

Blog