Romanian Constitutional Court to debate Big Brother law on Wednesday

The Law for Cybernetic Security, voted unanimously in the Senate on December 19, after it was adopted by the Chamber of Deputies, will be debated by the Constitutional Court on Wednesday, January 21, 2015.

The law is very intensely debated these days, with some in favor and others against its adoption.

The Romanian Intelligence Service (SRI), for instance, said in a press release sent to Hotnews.ro that The Law of Cybernetic Security is “indispensable” for enforcing the necessary measures to counter cyber-attacks, against the backdrop of unprecedented growth of cybernetic threats. The SRI argued that the version of the law which was adopted by the Parliament does not violate fundamental rights and freedom.

“We reiterate the fact that the law, as it was adopted by the Romanian Parliament, does not allow state institutions access to data related to the private life of individuals without previous approval from a judge. From this point of view, we believe the grounds, speculations and accusations that have surfaced in the public space are lacking any real basis,” according to the press release.

On the other hand, a number of NGOs are fiercely opposing the law.

The Association for The Defence of Human Rights in Romania- The Helsinki Committee (APADOR-CH) and The Association for Technology and Internet (ApTI), with the support of other 11 NGOs, have submitted an amicus curiae document in which they support the claims that this law is unconstitutional, which were raised by the parliamentary group of the National Liberal Party, according to a press release posted on the APADOR-CH website.

This procedure would allow NGOs with expertise in the field to submit observations that might be relevant and help the court rule on this matter.

According to the NGOs, Law 580/2014 violates fundamental rights such as the right to a private and family life, the inviolability of the home, the right to private correspondence, the free development of human personality and dignity, the principle of the separation and balance of powers, etc.

The NGOs argue that article 17 (1) in the law, which allows nine public institutions to have access to any information, without the need for approval from a judge, does not respect the principle of defending private life.