A simple piece of paper to requests for subscriber information has led to a discussion about Swedish law and the rules that really apply: a decision by the European Court of Justice or the Swedish law on electronic communication. In each ring corner stands the police and the operator Bahnhof, a not entirely unknown debater when it comes to data storage.
Spring 2014 annulled the EU Court the then prevailing data storage directive, which means that telephone and Internet operators to store traffic half a year. The investigation that followed concluded however that the Swedish law remained. And now we can say that Bahnhof taken brawl to the next round. This by offering the police a form that clearly shows whether the allegations involving serious crimes or not.
– We do this because we want to ensure that the information only for serious offenses and nothing else. We disclose customer information to police if suspicion for serious offenses. According to a decision of the European Court of Justice in April last year, while it is okay with data storage, but it must be proportionate to the suspicions. There must be a serious crime and it must be tried before. It does not occur in Sweden today, says Jon Karlung, CEO of Bahnhof.
Also read: Harsh criticism against the report on data storage – “waving aside privacy issues”
On the form that Bahnhof offers, the authority requesting the information tick a yes or a no-box. If the offense is serious, as stated in the Judicial 27th chapter Section 19? If yes, the information is supplied, if no: request not addressed.
- Our view is based on the decision of the European Court of Justice and that it is above the law on electronic communication, says Jon Karlung.
Herein lies the dispute. For according to the police is nothing in law that supports the requirements of the form. Nor that there is nothing that says that Swedish law does not apply.
- We apply Swedish law, Bahnhof doing something else. Subscriber data must be submitted to the authority of the authority to take action against a crime. Concerning the decision of the European Court of Justice made an investigation and said that Swedish law applies until otherwise stated, says Anders Ahlqvist, operations specialist at the National cybercrime center.
Also read: Bahnhof takes battle for data storage to the European Commission
The report that came in March received much criticism . A party statement said the Bar Association, an opinion even Jon Karlung parts.
– Yes, is a clean-up job that was developed by a man investigator, Sten Heckscher. He came up with exactly what the government wanted him to come up. I can not see that his paper is above the European Court of Justice.
Bahnhof believe that the crucial issue is whether the case of a serious crime or not. A question that is not up to them to decide, the assessment shall be made by the police and judiciary. If they do not apply to a serious offense, an offense that can give at least six months in jail, they refuse to disclose the data. Anders Ahlqvist says that the suspicions only need to apply crime point.
- Key question for us is another. In my world, Swedish law applies in Sweden. I can not choose to follow what pleases me, says Anders Ahlqvist.
Read also: Bahnhofs label should keep the NSA out
Anders Ahlqvist says that police have a case where the requested tasks from Bahnhof but have not received them . In a case of sexual exploitation of children. The police have sent an appeal to the regulator, PTS, but received no answer yet.
– We sent in the case in October but has still not received a formal response. Generally, it takes time to PTS, but a regulatory authority that does not handle such a matter promptly, it’s … it’s strange that it should take two months to decide whether the law on electronic surveillance are applicable or not, he says.
A matter where Tele2 and PTS is that parties are right now, of Appeals, which in turn requested a ruling from the European Court of Justice. The issue is whether the operator must store data on data traffic, despite the annulment of the Data Retention Directive. One who are expected next year.
No comments:
Post a Comment