Digital Evidence gathering from service providers: a worrying paradigm shift in international cooperation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22197/rbdpp.v5i3.288Keywords:
Digital Evidence, Judicial cooperation, fundamental rights.Abstract
It is becoming increasingly common that digital evidence relevant to criminal proceedings is not located in the State in which the crime was committed, but it is spread in the cloud computing, and it can be accessed only thanks to the intervention of the service providers that hold it. In such cases traditional instruments of judicial cooperation enter into crisis, since it can become very difficult to identify an executing State to which the evidence requests can be addressed. Hence the idea, implemented by a proposal for a European Union regulation, to create a channel of direct cooperation between the judicial authorities interested in acquiring the evidence and the providers, who would be responsible for verifying that the evidence requests respect the Charter of Nice. The result, however, is the privatization of an activity traditionally reserved to public bodies: a worrying paradigm shift that could put fundamental rights in serious danger.Downloads
References
ATERNO, Stefano. Cloud forensics: aspetti giuridici e tecnici. In CADOPPI Alberto, CANESTRARI Stefano, MANNA Adelmo, PAPA Michele (a cura di). Cybercrime. Torino: Utet, 2019, p. 1689 s.
BARTOLI, Laura. Digital evidence for the criminal trial: limitless cloud and state boundaries. Big data and Public Law: new challenges beyond data protection, rivista.eurojus.it, 2019, num. spec., p. 96 s.
BÖSE, Martin. An assessment of the Commission’s proposals on electronic evidence. europarl.europa.eu, 21 settembre 2018.
CARRERA, Sergio, GONZÁLEZ FUSTER, Gloria, GUILD, Elspeth, MITSILEGAS, Valsamis. Access to Electronic Data by Third-Country Law Enforcement Authorities: Challenges to EU Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights, Brussels: Centre for European Policy Studies, 2015.
DANIELE, Marcello. La prova digitale nel processo penale. Rivista di diritto processuale. Padova, p. 283 s., 2011.
DANIELE, Marcello. Regole di esclusione e regole di valutazione, Torino: Giappichelli, 2009.
DASKAL, Jennifer. Borders and bits, 71 Vanderbilt Law Review. p. 179 s., 2018.
DE HERT, Paul, PARLAR, Cihan, THUMFART, Johannes. Legal arguments used in courts regarding territoriality and cross-border production orders: From Yahoo Belgium to Microsoft Ireland. New Journal of European Criminal Law, v. 9 (3), p. 326 s., 2018.
GERACI, Rosa Maria. La circolazione transfrontaliera delle prove digitali in UE: la proposta di regolamento di e-evidence. Cassazione penale, p. 1340 s., 2019.
GIALUZ Mitja, DELLA TORRE Jacopo. Lotta alla criminalità nel cyberspazio: la Commissione presenta due proposte per facilitare la circolazione delle prove elettroniche nei processi penali. Penalecontemporaneo.it, f. 5, p. 277 s., 2018.
MITSILEGAS, Valsamis. The privatisation of mutual trust in Europe’s area of criminal justice: The case of e-evidence, Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, vol. 25 (3), p. 263 s., 2018.
NEGRI, Daniele. La regressione della procedura penale ad arnese poliziesco (sia pure tecnologico). Archivio penale, f. 3, p. 44 s., 2015.
PEZZUTO, Raffaella. Accesso transnazionale alla prova elettronica nel procedimento penale: la nuova iniziativa legislativa della Commissione europea al vaglio del Consiglio dell'Unione. Penalecontemporaneo.it, f. 1, p. 57 s., 2019.
POLLICINO, Oreste, BASSINI, Marco. La proposta di Regolamento e-Evidence: osservazioni a caldo e possibili sviluppi. Medialaws.ue, 26 ottobre 2018.
SIGNORATO, Silvia. Le indagini digitali. Profili strutturali di una metamorfosi investigativa. Torino: Giappichelli, 2018.
SIRACUSANO, Fabrizio. La prova informatica transnazionale: un difficile “connubio” fra innovazione e tradizione, Processo penale e giustizia, f. 1, p. 178 s. 2017.
SPOENLE, Jan. Cloud Computing and cybercrime investigations: Territoriality vs. the power of disposal? Coe.it, 31 agosto 2010.
WOODS, Andrew Keane. Against Data Exceptionalism. 68 Stanford Law Review, p. 279 s., 2016.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
As of 2022, articles published in the RDPP are licensed under Creative Commons Atribuição 4.0 Internacional. rticles published until 2021 adopted the Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial 4.0 Internacional.
How to Cite
