CASE OF BREYER v. GERMANY ( APPLICATION NO 50001/12)

The European Court of Human Rights decided on the date of 30.01.2020 that requirement to collect data to identify users of pre-paid SIM cards did not violate the right to privacy.  In the Breyer v. Germany case, it was held that there had been no violation of article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention on Human Rights.

04 February 2020

In the present case, the applicants, Patrick Breyer and Jonas Breyer who are also civil liberties activists, lodged a constitutional complaint against the various sections of the 2004 Amendments to the Telecommunication Act including 111, 112 and 113 that oblige telecommunication companies (service providers) to collect and store the personal details of all their customers.

Moreover, the Amendment allows the authorities to access it both, automatically and on demand. However, on 24 January 2012 the Federal Constitutional Court found that the provisions in question were compatible with the Basic Law as being proportionate and justified.

Upon this decision, the applicants brought the claim about the storage of their personal data depending on article 8 (right to respect for private and family life, the home and the correspondence) and article 10 (freedom of expression) to the European Court of Human Rights on 27 July 2012.

It was stated by the Court that Governments had some margin of appreciation when pursuing the legitimate aim of protecting national security. The Court found that the obligation to store the data was in general a suitable response to changes in communications behaviour and in the means of telecommunications and stated that only limited set of data had been stored as it did not include highly personal information and communications traffic. In this sense, it was concluded under this matter that the interference in the present case was of a rather limited nature and the storage period is not inappropriate.

In addition to the matter above, the Court assessed the proportionality of the interference by the provisions on access to the data. The Court held that the authorities which could request access were specifically listed in section 112 and were all concerned with law enforcement or the protection of national security constituted a limiting factor.

As a conclusion of the decision, the Court found Germany not to overstepped the certain margin of appreciation and that the storage of the applicants’ personal data had been proportionate and necessary in a democratic society.

You can find the full text of the decision here.

Should you have any queries and/or remarks, please do not hesitate to contact us. 

Kind regards,

Zumbul Attorneys-at-Law

info@zumbul.av.tr