Issuu

THE RECENT REFORM OF SPANISH CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATIONS

COMITÉ CIENTÍFICO DE LA EDITORIAL TIRANT LO BLANCH MARÍA JOSÉ AÑÓN ROIG

Catedrática de Filosofía del Derecho de la Universidad de Valencia

ANA CAÑIZARES LASO Catedrática de Derecho Civil de la Universidad de Málaga

JORGE A. CERDIO HERRÁN

Catedrático de Teoría y Filosofía de Derecho. Instituto Tecnológico Autónomo de México

JOSÉ RAMÓN COSSÍO DÍAZ

Ministro de la Suprema Corte de Justicia de México

EDUARDO FERRER MAC-GREGOR POISOT Presidente de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. Investigador del Instituto de Investigaciones Jurídicas de la UNAM

OWEN FISS Catedrático emérito de Teoría del Derecho de la Universidad de Yale (EEUU)

JOSÉ ANTONIO GARCÍA-CRUCES GONZÁLEZ

Catedrático de Derecho Mercantil de la UNED

LUIS LÓPEZ GUERRA

Juez del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos Catedrático de Derecho Constitucional de la Universidad Carlos III de Madrid

ÁNGEL M. LÓPEZ Y LÓPEZ

Catedrático de Derecho Civil de la Universidad de Sevilla

MARTA LORENTE SARIÑENA

Catedrática de Historia del Derecho de la Universidad Autónoma de Madrid

JAVIER DE LUCAS MARTÍN

Catedrático de Filosofía del Derecho y Filosofía Política de la Universidad de Valencia

VÍCTOR MORENO CATENA

Catedrático de Derecho Procesal de la Universidad Carlos III de Madrid

FRANCISCO MUÑOZ CONDE

Catedrático de Derecho Penal de la Universidad Pablo de Olavide de Sevilla

ANGELIKA NUSSBERGER

Jueza del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos. Catedrática de Derecho Internacional de la Universidad de Colonia (Alemania)

HÉCTOR OLASOLO ALONSO

Catedrático de Derecho Internacional de la Universidad del Rosario (Colombia) y Presidente del Instituto Ibero-Americano de La Haya (Holanda)

LUCIANO PAREJO ALFONSO

Catedrático de Derecho Administrativo de la Universidad Carlos III de Madrid

TOMÁS SALA FRANCO

Catedrático de Derecho del Trabajo y de la Seguridad Social de la Universidad de Valencia

IGNACIO SANCHO GARGALLO

Magistrado de la Sala Primera (Civil) del Tribunal Supremo de España

TOMÁS S. VIVES ANTÓN

Catedrático de Derecho Penal de la Universidad de Valencia

RUTH ZIMMERLING

Catedrática de Ciencia Política de la Universidad de Mainz (Alemania)

Procedimiento de selección de originales, ver página web: www.tirant.net/index.php/editorial/procedimiento-de-seleccion-de-originales

¿CÓMO TRANSFORMAR LASRECENT POLICÍAS? THE REFORM ANÁLISIS DE CRIMINAL OPCIONES OF SPANISH Y ESTRATEGIAS PARA REFORMAR PROCEDURE: FUNDAMENTAL ELRIGHTS MANDO POLICIAL EN MÉXICO AND TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATIONS

BERNARDO GONZÁLEZ-ARÉCHIGA (UVM) MANUEL DÍAZ MARTÍNEZ DAVID PÉREZ ESPARZA (UCL) INMACULADA LÓPEZ-BARAJAS PEREA JUAN SALGADO IBARRA (CIDE) JOSÉ ANTONIOEditors CABELLERO (CIDE)

Valencia, 20192016 Ciudad de México,

Copyright ® 2019 Todos los derechos reservados. Ni la totalidad ni parte de este libro puede reproducirse o transmitirse por ningún procedimiento electrónico o mecánico, incluyendo fotocopia, grabación magnética, o cualquier almacenamiento de información y sistema de recuperación sin permiso escrito de los autores y del editor. En caso de erratas y actualizaciones, la Editorial Tirant lo Blanch publicará la pertinente corrección en la página web www.tirant.com.

© TIRANT LO BLANCH EDITA: TIRANT LO BLANCH C/ Artes Gráficas, 14 - 46010 - Valencia TELFS.: 96/361 00 48 - 50 FAX: 96/369 41 51 Email:tlb@tirant.com www.tirant.com Librería virtual: www.tirant.es ISBN: 978-84-1313-081-1 MAQUETA: Innovatext Si tiene alguna queja o sugerencia, envíenos un mail a: atencioncliente@tirant.com. En caso de no ser atendida su sugerencia, por favor, lea en www.tirant.net/index.php/empresa/politicas-de-empresa nuestro Procedimiento de quejas. Responsabilidad Social Corporativa: http://www.tirant.net/Docs/RSCTirant.pdf

THE RECENT REFORM OF SPANISH CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATIONS1 Published within the framework of the I+D Project (State programme for the promotion of scientific research and technical excellence), “Procedural challenges when dealing with the criminal use of ICT in the information society” (Reference: DER2013-47856-P), financed by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness. Principal investigators: Manuel Díaz Martínez and Inmaculada López-Barajas Perea.

Translated from the Spanish original by Sophie Gates and Duncan Gates.

Index PRESENTATION................................................................................ 15 Manuel Díaz Martínez and Inmaculada López Barajas Perea

I. ON THE CONCEPT OF THE SCOPE OF THE MEASURE OF TECHNOLOGICAL INTERFERENCE IN ORGANIC LAW 13/2015 José Luis Rodríguez Lainz

1. APPROACH................................................................................. 19 2. THE ORIGIN OF THE CONCEPT OF THE SCOPE OF THE MEASURE................................................................................... 21 2.1. Pertinent case law and academic background....................... 21 2.2. The influence of the European Court of Human Rights doctrine on electronic searches................................................... 29 3. THE REGULATION OF THE SCOPE OF THE MEASURE IN TECHNOLOGICAL INTERFERENCE IN ORGANIC LAW 13/2015........................................................................................ 35 II. USEFULNESS OF DATA RETAINED FROM ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS FOR DEALING WITH EMERGENCIES Luis Manuel Vallés Causada

1. INTRODUCTION: A PHENOMENOLOGICAL FRAME OF REFERENCE............................................................................... 43 2. SPECIFICATION PRINCIPLE AND PROPORTIONALITY PRINCIPLE. PROCEDURAL LEGAL BASIS FOR GEOLOCATION OF ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION DEVICES......... 46 3. DESCRIPTION OF POSSIBLE SCENARIOS............................... 49 4. HOW AND WITH WHAT IS AN ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS DEVICE GEOLOCATED?.......................................... 51 A) Real-time geolocation by telephone interception.................... 53 B) Geolocation only with data stored pursuant to the LCDCE... 53 C) Geolocation with coverage data............................................. 54 5. TOWARDS A LEGE FERENDA PROPOSAL.............................. 55 6. CONTROVERSIAL ASPECTS OF DATA RETENTION LEGISLATION....................................................................................... 57 7. DE LEGE FERENDA PROPOSAL.............................................. 60

Index

III. CAPTURE AND RECORDING OF VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS BY THE USE OF ELECTRONIC DEVICES Manuel Díaz Martínez

1. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS.................................................. 63 2. THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT JUDGMENT 145/2014 AND THE CJEU JUDGMENT OF 8 APRIL 2014 AS SIGNIFICANT REFORM MILESTONES................................................. 65 3. LEGAL ARRANGEMENTS AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES........ 67 3.1. Legal regulation................................................................... 67 3.2. Guiding principles................................................................ 68 A) Specification principle.................................................... 68 B) Proportionality principle................................................ 69 4. SCOPE OF THE INTERFERENCE AND FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AFFECTED.................................................................... 71 5. PREREQUISITES FOR LEGITIMACY......................................... 74 6. CONTENT OF THE JUDGE’S RULING..................................... 76 6.1. Common requirements......................................................... 77 6.2. The determination of the place or rooms and meetings of the person under investigation as specific requirements........ 78 6.3. The exclusion of conversations between the person under investigation and his/her lawyer........................................... 81 7. DURATION OF THE MEASURE................................................ 82 8. JUDICIAL CONTROL OF THE MEASURE AND ACCESS OF THE PARTIES TO THE RECORDINGS...................................... 83 8.1. Judicial control of the measure............................................. 83 8.2. Access of the parties to the recordings.................................. 85 9. DESTRUCTION OF RECORDS.................................................. 86 10. CAUSAL FINDINGS.................................................................... 86 11. CONCLUSIONS.......................................................................... 87 IV. THE USE OF TECHNICAL DEVICES FOR IMAGE CAPTURE, MONITORING AND TRACKING. WHEN FORENSIC PRACTICE CAN’T WAIT… Eduardo Gómez Soler

1. CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS AND NEW TECHNOLOGIES. 91 2. THE LONG-AWAITED REFORM OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW IN RELATION TO INVESTIGATIVE MEASURES... 93 2.1. The harsh reality.................................................................. 93

Index

2.2. The reform of the Criminal Procedure Law in relation to technological investigative measures..................................... 94 2.3. Common provisions............................................................. 95 3. THE NEW CHAPTER VII OF TITLE VIII OF BOOK II OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW.................................................. 96 3.1. Use of technical image capture devices................................. 97 A) A purely police action.................................................... 97 B) The general rule: the party under investigation.............. 99 C) The exception: persons other than the investigated person. 101 D) Duration of the measure................................................ 102 E) Control of the measure.................................................. 103 F) The rest of the applicable common provisions............... 103 3.2. Use of technical monitoring and tracking devices................. 104 A) The general rule: Reservation of judicial authorization. Necessity and proportionality principles........................ 107 B) The exception: Where there are reasons of urgency....... 108 C) Duration of the measure................................................ 109 D) Judicial control of the use of the measure...................... 109 E) The custody and destruction of records......................... 110 4. CONCLUSIONS.......................................................................... 111 V. THE RIGHT TO PROTECTION OF THE VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENT AND ITS LIMITS: THE SEARCH OF COMPUTER SYSTEMS Inmaculada López-Barajas Perea

1. THE RIGHT TO THE DIGITAL OR VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENT.......................................................................................... 113 2. THE JURISDICTIONAL GUARANTEE AND ITS CONTENT... 117 3. SUBJECT-MATTER...................................................................... 119 3.1. Nature................................................................................. 120 3.2. Extent of the measure........................................................... 121 3.3. Reference to cross-border searches....................................... 122 3.4. Scope of the measure............................................................ 127 4. SAFEGUARDING AND CUSTODY OF THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE DEVICES................................................. 128 4.1. The duty to cooperate.......................................................... 131 5. REMOTE SEARCH OF COMPUTER EQUIPMENT................... 132 6. CONCLUSIONS.......................................................................... 135

Index

VI. EVIDENTIARY PECULIARITIES OF THE DRONE AS A TECHNOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE Federico Bueno de Mata

1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................ 137 2. COMMENTS ON THE NEW LEGAL FRAMEWORK: FROM ROYAL DECREE 1036/2017 TO THE 2018-2021 STRATEGIC PLAN FOR DRONE CIVIL SECTOR DEVELOPMENT............. 138 3. THE VARIOUS POSSIBILITIES FOR DRONE USE BY CIVILIANS AND AGENTS OF THE COURT.................................................. 141 A) The drone as a recreational device.......................................... 141 B) The drone as a police investigative tool.................................. 142 C) The drone as a tool of the court............................................. 143 4. THE DRONE AS EVIDENCE: PROCEDURAL ARRANGEMENTS........................................................................................ 149 5. CHALLENGES AHEAD.............................................................. 153 VII. THE USE OF ELECTRONIC DEVICES TO INTERCEPT COMMUNICATIONS IN POLICE INFILTRATION OPERATIONS Marta Gómez de Liaño Fonseca-Herrero

1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................ 157 2. A NEW CRIME SCENARIO........................................................ 158 3. COVERT INVESTIGATION TECHNIQUES............................... 160 A) The use of infiltration............................................................. 161 B) Infiltration by undercover agents............................................ 162 4. MODERN EVIDENCE-GATHERING TECHNIQUES................ 164 5. INTERCEPTING AND RECORDING OF COMMUNICATIONS IN OPERATIONS WITH AN UNDERCOVER AGENT.. 166 A) Intercepting of telephone and electronic communications...... 167 B) Intercepting and recording of third-party voice communications....................................................................................... 168 C) Intercepting and recording of own voice communications...... 169 a) Dialogue akin to an interrogation.................................. 170 b) Entry into a home.......................................................... 172 i) Predictability of entry............................................... 172 ii) Entry by invitation................................................... 174 c) Planned meetings........................................................... 176

Index

VIII. TECHNOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIVE MEASURES IN GERMAN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY Alicia González Navarro

1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................ 179 2. TECHNOLOGICAL METHODS OF CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION AND THE RIGHT TO SECRECY OF COMMUNICATIONS.......................................................................................... 180 2.1. Interception of telecommunications. The Telekommunikationsüberwachung................................................................ 181 2.1.1. General questions: Section 100a StPO and Articles 588 ter a et seq. of the Spanish Criminal Procedure Law..... 181 2.1.2. The intervention in encrypted telecommunications: special reference to the so-called Quellen-Telekommunikationsüberwachung and to telephony via the internet..................................................................... 188 2.2. Remote search of computer equipment: Online-Durchsuchung.. 193 2.3. Data retention order (Article 588 octies Criminal Procedure Law) and Vorratsdatenspeicherung: Sections 113a and 113b TKG, 100g StPO.................................................................. 194 3. CONCLUSION............................................................................ 198 IX. PROBLEMS POSED BY INCORPORATION OF THE AMERICAN MODEL OF REWARDING THE WHISTLEBLOWER IN THE SPANISH LEGAL SYSTEM AND IN REGULATORY COMPLIANCE Jordi Gimeno Beviá

1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................ 200 2. THE NEED FOR PROTECTION FOR THE WHISTLEBLOWER 202 3. THE EVOLVING CONCEPT OF THE BOUNTY HUNTER....... 203 4. THE BOUNTY HUNTER AND FINANCIAL CRIME (BOUNTY PROGRAMMES)................................................................... 205 A) The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) bounty programme.................................................................................. 206 B) The rewards programme of the Department of Justice (DOJ) under the False Claims Act (FCA)........................................... 207 5. A PRACTICAL CASE: AND IF FALCIANI HAD BEEN GIVEN A REWARD? BIRKENFELD IN THE US VS FALCIANI IN SPAIN.. 208 5.1. The birkenfeld case in the US............................................... 208 5.2. The Falciani case in Spain.................................................... 210

Index

5.3 The relationship between Supreme Court Judgment 116/2017 and the promotion of rewards................................................ 211 5.4. Rewards as a tool in the fight against tax fraud: the tax inspectors’ proposal................................................................ 214 6. REWARDING WHISTLEBLOWING AND THE LEGAL ENTITY: ITS IMPACT ON CRIMINAL REGULATORY COMPLIANCE..... 215 A) The safeguard of the internal whistleblowing channel............ 216 B) The lack of a need for a financial incentive............................. 217 7. CONCLUSION............................................................................ 218 X. CYBERCRIME AND THE REFORMS OF THE SPANISH CRIMINAL CODE AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW: A LOST OPPORTUNITY Fernando Ibáñez López-Pozas

1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................ 221 2. CYBERCRIMES: AN UNFINISHED REFORM........................... 224 2.1. Criminal behaviour.............................................................. 224 2.2. Cybercrime statistics............................................................ 226 2.3. The response of the Courts................................................... 228 3. THE TECHNOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIVE MEASURES INTRODUCED BY ORGANIC LAW 13/2015................................. 229 4. LAW 41/2015 OF 5 OCTOBER AND CYBERCRIMES: THE REFORM OF ARTICLE 284 REGARDING THE MANDATORY SENDING OF THE CRIME REPORT......................................... 231 4.1. Approach............................................................................. 231 4.2. General characteristics of crimes and Article 284 of the Criminal Procedure Law...................................................... 234 A) Anonymity and speed of execution................................ 235 B) Generality of victims and victimization.......................... 236 C) Insignificance (or otherwise) of the harm caused............ 238 D) The geographical extent of the crimes, including transnational......................................................................... 240 5. CONCLUSION............................................................................ 241

Presentation Scientific progress in the telecommunications field has meant that almost all crimes now have a technological basis. In this context, the use of modern technologies by the police is an essential tool for obtaining digital evidence of crime, and for counteracting the sophisticated measures used by organized criminal groups and coping with the international nature of their activity. The police must have the necessary means, since the effectiveness of the courtâ€™s role is based, ultimately, on the effectiveness of the prior police action. However, criminal investigation using these technologies creates new challenges requiring a legislative response. One of these is the need to achieve a proper balance between the guarantee of public safety and the protection of privacy of persons under investigation. The very significant state interference in the private sphere of citizens that many of these measures entail cannot be ignored. Spainâ€™s Constitutional Court, in its Judgment 110/1984, of 26 November, has already referred to the global recognition of a right to privacy or private life that covers any intrusions into this reserved sphere of â€‹life by any method. Until recently, the areas in which private and family life took place were essentially confined to the home and correspondence. Now, new technologies mean that many aspects of private life are pursued in new dimensions, both physical and virtual, which also have to be protected. The complexity of the investigation of these crimes is compounded by the technical challenge involved in the management of new technologies and the creation of highly specialized investigative units within the Spanish Judicial Police. It is a field that is constantly evolving as a result of scientific innovation. In a short period of time, it has progressed from the search of a hard disk of a computer, by entering the address where it is located, to the use of sophisticated programs that allow online searches. Another example is the existence of drones, remotely manned, that allow an almost unlimited capacity of interference in open residential areas. The sophisticated instruments provided by this technological revolution have also required a functional interpretation or reinterpretation of Article

Presentation

18 of the Spanish Constitution. According to Spain’s Constitutional Court, advances in the telecommunications field, especially in connection with the use of information technology, require a new understanding of the concept of communication and of the subject-matter of fundamental rights, in order to extend protection to these new areas, as is necessarily derived from the literal wording of Art. 18.3 of the Spanish Constitution (Constitutional Court Judgment 70/2002). For its part, the Supreme Court, in a recent ruling, considers that the scope of constitutional protection provided by Art. 18.2 of the Spanish Constitution can only be adequately gauged by accepting that the act of home interference can be of a physical or virtual nature (Supreme Court Judgment 329/2016, of 20 April). In the Court’s opinion, protection is afforded both against physical and non-consensual entry into the domestic scenario, and against any clandestine observation of what happens inside, if it is necessary to use a technical recording device or image magnification. It argues that the intrusion into home privacy is of the same impact. New fundamental rights have also been recognized. As an example, the German Constitutional Court, as far back as 2007, recognized the new fundamental right to the confidentiality and integrity of technical information systems with regard to intrusions resulting from the emergence of online access techniques (BVerfG, 27-02-2008-BvR 370/07). This conduct, which involves a serious intrusion into the privacy of affected users, was not adequately protected by the right to the inviolability of the home. It seems clear that the guarantee of the right to the private sphere is one of the great challenges for legal systems at present and, therefore, also for Spain’s criminal procedure law. The latter represents the protection of a very important public interest, which is the legal repression of criminal behaviour. In the exercise of this essential function of the state, the adequate defence of the rights and freedoms of the persons involved must always be taken into account. As the European Court of Human Rights has pointed out, as technology becomes more sophisticated, appropriate legal instruments are required that can evolve so that they are capable of ensuring that the fundamental freedoms and rights of citizens are not violated with impunity.

Presentation

However, the Spanish Criminal Procedure Law has for a long time suffered from a regulatory lacuna with respect to investigative acts arising with the emergence of new technologies, which has caused a number of procedural difficulties. The Constitutional Court, in its Judgment 145/2014, affirmed that there was an unavoidable need for legislation to address intrusions in the privacy of the person being investigated in criminal proceedings. Attempting to correct the lack of regulation of certain investigative measures by resorting to inclusion by analogy exceeded the limits of what was constitutionally acceptable. Organic Law 13/2015, of 5 October, amending the Criminal Procedure Law for the strengthening of procedural guarantees and regulation of technological investigative measures, is an attempt to rectify this regulatory inadequacy. This work analyses, as one of its priority objectives, the requirements derived from the legality principle in order to determine if the new legislation defines with sufficient precision the methods for and the extent of the exercise of the powers granted, so as to provide the individual with adequate protection against arbitrariness. The issue is to attempt to determine to what extent and in what circumstances interference in the area of fundamental rights recognized in Art. 18 of the Spanish Constitution, as a result of conducting certain criminal investigation proceedings, can be legitimate. This represents the conclusion of the research project â€œProcedural challenges for combatting the criminal use of ICT in the information societyâ€? (DER2013-47856-P), within the framework of the State Programme for the Promotion of Scientific Research and Technical Excellence, granted by the Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness and which has provided financial support for this publication. The final objective is fulfilled, in the form of a scientific and critical analysis permitting an assessment of the essential features and the usefulness of the tools made available to the Spanish legal system in order to combat new forms of criminality associated with information and communication technologies, within the criminal procedure framework. In the preparation of this work, specialists and representatives of the various sectors involved have been called upon to offer their theoretical and practical perspectives with regard to the different

Presentation

issues under analysis. Indeed, part of this work was presented at the International Congress, “The recent reform of criminal procedure: fundamental rights and technological innovations”, held at the Law School of the UNED, from 17 to 19 October 2017. At this conference, senior representatives of the Constitutional Court, the Supreme Court, the Judicial Police and the Academy presented and debated the most controversial aspects of the matter, in a search for global answers for an interconnected world. To all of the above, and to all those who have worked on this initiative, we would like to express our deepest gratitude.

Manuel Díaz Martínez and Inmaculada López Barajas Perea Principal Investigators of Project DER2013-47856-P

I. On the concept of the scope of the measure of technological interference in Organic Law 13/2015 José Luis Rodríguez Lainz Principal Judge of Investigating Court No. 4 of Cordoba.

SUMMARY: 1. APPROACH. 2. THE ORIGIN OF THE CONCEPT OF THE SCOPE OF THE MEASURE. 2.1. Pertinent case law and academic background. 2.2. The influence of the European Court of Human Rights doctrine on electronic searches. 3. THE REGULATION OF THE SCOPE OF THE MEASURE IN TECHNOLOGICAL INTERFERENCE IN ORGANIC LAW 13/2015.

1. APPROACH The Second Chamber of the Supreme Court, in its Supreme Court Judgment, 2nd Chamber, 740/2017, of 16 November1, apparently opens the way to a new way of analysing the problem of assessments of proportionality, necessity and suitability of any kind of technological investigative procedure. And it does so in the light of the significant reform introduced by Organic Law 13/2015, of 5 October, amending the Criminal Procedure Law to strengthen procedural guarantees and the regulation of technical investigative measures. On the occasion of a bitter complaint about the obsolete, practically anachronistic nature of the terms in which the content of communications interference authorizations is described, the highest court is clearly stating the need

Hereinafter we will refer to the judgments of such Chamber as Supreme Court Judgments.

José Luis Rodríguez Lainz

to adapt these historical and conventional models of the definition of interference to what it calls current formats. The approach, obviously, extends far beyond a mere terminological adaptation, because it directly connects with the reality of the almost unlimited potential of new interception techniques and the possibilities of extending them to unexpected aspects of the private life of people in this context of the virtual environment that can be glimpsed in each and every one of the reasonings of the legal discourse of the judgment2. This approach brings with it the definite materialisation of a concept that, expressly recognized in the currently in force Art. 588 bis c.3,c of the Criminal Procedure Law, under the guise of “extent of the interception measure, specifying its scope”, appeared to be a novel update of the understanding of interception of electronic communications. As against the apparent technical neutrality of the so-called data associated with a telephone call, the judgment warns us of the potential of such data, interrelated to each other, to provide added knowledge of aspects that indeed are not, it considers, unrelated to the privacy of the communicators. And from this it extrapolates as a consequence the need to address a specific treatment of the true objective dimension or scope of the interception measures, as an indispensable prerequisite for the adaptation thereof to the demands of what are defined in the reform of the Criminal Procedure Law as guiding principles. –Art. 588 bis a of the Criminal Procedure Law–. But this seemingly novel way of understanding the very definition of authorizing resolutions has a relatively long historical providence, originating with the rapporteur of the judgment’s own approaches3 and judgments both of the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court, and incontestable precedents in the case law of the European 2

“Telephone communications through mobile telephony and electronic communications through the internet put us in a game-changing scenario in which the knowledge of the intercepted conversations can have as much importance for the investigation as the electronic data associated thereto. And it is disturbing that the judge that authorizes the state’s intervention in these communications remains anchored in a historical vision that requires him/her to remain silent with respect to the additional information provided by the new channels of inter-communication.” Mr Manuel Marchena Gómez, current Hon. President of the Second Chamber of the Spanish Supreme Court.