Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The new regulation of technology-related investigative measures in Spain

  • Article
  • Published:
ERA Forum Aims and scope

Abstract

This paper analyses—with special attention to its common provisions, its safeguards of technology-related investigation measures and its guiding principles—the Spanish legal reform of the Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter, LECrim) of 2015, which updated the domestic framework with a new and modern regulation of technology-related investigative measures, in order to comply with the requirements of the Cybercrime Convention, the ECHR case law and other EU legal instruments, and to help the Law Enforcement Agencies on gathering digital evidence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. See Sinrod/Reilly [12].

  2. Regarding the Council of Europe, see the Recommendations No R (89) 9 on computer-related crime, No R (95) 13 concerning problems of criminal procedural law connected with information technology, and Rec(2005) 10 on ‘special investigation techniques’ in relation to serious crimes including acts of terrorism. Regarding the European Union, see, among others, the widely recognised study by Ulrich Sieber Legal Aspects of Computer-Related Crime in the Information Society—COMCRIME; the Communication e-Europe 2002, COM (2000) 890 final; the Communication Towards a general policy on the fight against cyber crime, COM (2007) 267 final; the Council’s strategy to reinforce the fight against cybercrime (2008); the Communication An area of freedom, security and justice serving the citizen, COM (2009) 262 final; the Stockholm Programme and the Action Plan Implementing the Stockholm Programme, COM (2010) 171 final.

  3. In their judgments of 30th July 1998 (Valenzuela Contreras v. Spain) and 18th February 2003 (Prado Bugallo v. Spain), the European Court of Human Rights held unanimously that the Spanish regulation of wiretapping violated Article 8 of the Convention because it established insufficient safeguards to avoid abuses of power such as a definition of the categories of people liable to have their telephones tapped by judicial order, the nature of the offences which may give rise to such an order, a limit on the duration of telephone tapping, the procedure for drawing up the summary reports containing intercepted conversations, the precautions to be taken in order to communicate the recordings intact and in their entirety for possible inspection by the judge and by the defence and the circumstances in which recordings may or must be erased or the tapes destroyed, in particular where an accused has been discharged by an investigating judge or acquitted by a court.

  4. Vaciago/Ramalho [14], p. 93.

  5. See ECtHR, Huvig v. France, no. 11105/84, 24.4.1990, § 33: “Tapping and other forms of interception of telephone conversations represent a serious interference with private life and correspondence and must accordingly be based on a ”law” that is particularly precise. It is essential to have clear, detailed rules on the subject, especially as the technology available for use is continually becoming more sophisticated.”

  6. See the SSTS of 27 June 2002, 25 July and 25 September 2003.

  7. See Castro/Torres-Dulce [3].

  8. See Hernández Guerrero [8], p. 350 and 391; Bañuls Gómez [2].

  9. Adesco [1].

  10. Osula [10].

  11. See the Explanatory Report, at paras. 193-195. Available at: http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Reports/Html/185.htm.

  12. See Gercke [6], p. 207. See also the Explanatory Report, at para. 293: “they may voluntarily disclose the data to law enforcement officials or permit such officials to access the data, as provided in the Article. In favour of cross-border searches”, see Goldschmith [7].

  13. Council of Europe Cybercrime Convention Committee (T-CY) [5].

  14. Koops/Goodwin [9], p. 55.

  15. Spoenle [13].

  16. Conings [4].

  17. See Schwerha [11].

References

  1. Adesco, A.: The demise of anonymity: a constitutional challenge to the convention on cybercrime. Loyola Los Angel. Entertain. Law Rev. 23, 90 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bañuls Gómez, F.: Las intervenciones telefónicas a la luz de la jurisprudencia más reciente (2007). Available at http://noticias.juridicas.com

  3. Castro, G., Torres-Dulce, E.: Garrigues commentary. Litigation and Arbitration, 8-2015. Available at http://www.garrigues.com/en_GB/new/organic-law-132015-amending-criminal-procedure-law-strengthen-procedural-guarantees-and-regulate

  4. Conings, C.: Locating criminal investigative measures in a virtual environment. Where do searches take place in cyberspace’. B-CCENTRE Legal Research report 43-72 (2015). Available at https://lirias.kuleuven.be/handle/123456789/492870

  5. Council of Europe Cybercrime Convention Committee (T-CY): (Draft) Elements of an additional protocol to the Budapest convention on cybercrime regarding transborder access to data (April 9, 2013). Available at http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/cooperation/economiccrime/Source/Cybercrime/TCY/TCY%202013/T-CY%282013%2914transb_elements_protocol_V2.pdf

  6. Gercke, M.: Understanding Cybercrime, 1st edn. UIT, Ginebra (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Goldschmith, J.: The internet and the legitimacy of remote cross-border searches. University of Chicago Legal Forum. Available at http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=285732

  8. Hernández Guerrero, F.: La intervención de las comunicaciones electrónicas’. 3 Estudios Jurídicos. Ministerio Fiscal 350 et 391 (2001)

  9. Koops, B-J., Goodwin, M.: Cyberspace, the cloud, and cross-border criminal investigation. the limits and possibilities of international law. Tilburg Institute for Law, Technology, and Society CTLD—Center for Transboundary Legal Development, December 2014. Tilburg Law School research paper No. 5/2016. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2698263

  10. Osula, A-M.: Accessing extraterritorially located data: options for states. NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre for Excellence, Tallinn (2015). Available at https://ccdcoe.org/sites/default/files/multimedia/pdf/Accessing%20extraterritorially%20located%20data%20options%20for%20States_Anna-Maria_Osula.pdf

  11. Schwerha, J.: Law enforcement challenges in cross-border acquisition of electronic evidence from cloud computing providers. January 2010. Available at https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=09000016802fa3dc

  12. Sinrod, E.J., Reilly, W.P.: Cyber-crimes: a practical approach to the application of federal computer crime laws. Santa Clara Comput. High Technol. Law J. 16, 179 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Spoenle, J.: Cloud computing and cybercrime investigations: territoriality vs. the power of disposal? Council of Europe, Strasbourg (2010). Available at https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=09000016802fa3df

  14. Vaciago, G., Ramalho, D.S.: Online searches and online surveillance: the use of trojans and other types of malware as means of obtaining evidence in criminal proceedings. Dig. Evid. Electron. Signat. Law Rev. 13, 93 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Castilla-La Mancha (Spain), Cobertizo de San Pedro Mártir s/n, 45071, Toledo, Spain

    Juan Carlos Ortiz-Pradillo

Authors
  1. Juan Carlos Ortiz-Pradillo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Juan Carlos Ortiz-Pradillo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ortiz-Pradillo, J.C. The new regulation of technology-related investigative measures in Spain. ERA Forum 18, 425–435 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12027-017-0484-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12027-017-0484-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation