Urteil des Iri­schen High Court i.S. Schrems v. 18. Juni 2014

Urteil des Iri­schen High Court i.S. Schrems v. 18. Juni 2014, u.a. mit fol­gen­der Aussage:

52. In this regard, it is very dif­fi­cult to see how the mass and undif­fe­ren­tia­ted acces­sing by Sta­te aut­ho­ri­ties of per­so­nal data gene­ra­ted perhaps espe­cial­ly wit­hin the home – such as e‑mails, text messages, inter­net usa­ge and tele­pho­ne calls – would pass any pro­por­tio­na­li­ty test or could sur­vi­ve con­sti­tu­tio­nal scru­ti­ny on this ground alo­ne. The poten­ti­al for abu­se in such cases would be enor­mous and might even give rise to the pos­si­bi­li­ty that no facet of pri­va­te or dome­stic life wit­hin the home would be immu­ne from poten­ti­al Sta­te scru­ti­ny and observation.

53. Such a sta­te of affairs – with its gloo­my echoes of the mass sta­te sur­veil­lan­ce pro­gram­mes con­duc­ted in tota­li­ta­ri­an sta­tes such as the Ger­man Demo­cra­tic Repu­blic of Ulb­richt and Hon­ecker – would be total­ly at odds with the basic pre­mi­ses and fun­da­men­tal values of the Con­sti­tu­ti­on: respect for human digni­ty and free­dom of the indi­vi­du­al (as per the Pream­ble); per­so­nal auto­no­my (Arti­cle 40.3.1 and Arti­cle 40.3.2); the invio­la­bi­li­ty of the dwel­ling (Arti­cle 40.5) and pro­tec­tion of fami­ly life (Arti­cle 41). As Har­di­man J. obser­ved in The Peop­le v. O’Brien [2012] IECCA 68, Arti­cle 40.5