Balancing the Right to Privacy and National Security Interests in the Digital Age


  • Ketevan Kukava



Secret Surveillance, Personal Data, National Security, International Communications, Bulk Interception.


In order to protect national security, the states widely use secret surveillance measures and monitor electronic communications, which poses high risks of arbitrariness and abuse of power. Modern technologies enable the states to collect and process personal data on an unprecedented scale. Therefore, the most important challenge in today’s world is to determine how to protect national security and prevent serious crimes without violating human rights. 

The judgments of the European Court of Human Rights provide guidance in terms of balancing the right to privacy and security interests. The present article aims to discuss the development of the case law of the European Court and the legal safeguards for protecting the right to privacy when the state carries out secret surveillance measures.  

Author Biography

Ketevan Kukava

PhD student of Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University Faculty of Law.


European Convention on Human Rights, Council of Europe, 1950.

Christakis T., A Fragmentation of EU/ECHR Law on Mass Surveillance: Initial Thoughts on the Big Brother Watch Judgment, European Law Blog, 2018, [31.07.2023].

Fenwick H., Proactive Counter-Terrorist Strategies in Conflict with Human Rights, International Review of Law, Computers & Technology, Vol. 22, No. 3, 2008, 259-260.

Hijmans H., The European Union as Guardian of Internet Privacy, The Story of Art 16 TFEU, Law, Governance and Technology Series, Vol. 31, Springer International Publishing Switzerland, 2016, 70, 100, 104.

Karaboga M., Matzner T., Obersteller H., Ochs C., Is there a Right to Offline Alternatives in a Digital World? in Data Protection and Privacy: (In)visibilities and Infrastructures, Leenes R., Brakel R.v., Gutwirth S., Hert P.D., (eds), Springer International Publishing AG, 2017.

Lubin A., We Only Spy on Foreigners: The Myth of Universal Right to Privacy and the Practice of Foreign Mass Surveillance, Chicago Journal of International Law, Vol. 18, No. 2, 2018, 530-533, 536, 551.

Milanovic M., The Grand Normalization of Mass Surveillance: ECtHR Grand Chamber Judgments in Big Brother Watch and Centrum för rättvisa, EJIL:Talk! 2021, [31.07.2023].

O'Leary S., Balancing Rights in a Digital Age, Irish Jurist, Vol. 59, 2018, 92.

Sloot B.v.d., Big Brother Watch and Others v. the United Kingdom & Centrum for Rattvisa v. Sweden: Does the Grand Chamber Set Back the Clock in Mass Surveillance Cases? European Data Protection Law Review (EDPL), Vol. 7, No. 2, 2021, 325.

Stepanovic I., Preventing Terrorism or Eliminating Privacy? Rethinking Mass Surveillance after Snowden Revelations, Strani Pravni Zivot (Foreign Legal Life), 2015(4), 236, 239.

Watt E., The Right to Privacy and the Future of Mass Surveillance, International Journal of Human Rights, Vol. 21, No. 7, 2017, 789.

Centrum för Rättvisa v. Sweden, [2021], ECtHR, N 35252/08.

Big Brother Watch and Others v. the United Kingdom, [2021], ECtHR, N 58170/13, 62322/14, 24960/15.

Szabó and Vissy v. Hungary, [2016], ECtHR, N 37138/14.

Roman Zakharov v. Russia, [2015], ECtHR, N 47143/06.

Digital Rights Ireland Ltd v Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources and Others and Kärntner Landesregierung and Others, [2014], CJEU, C 293/12, C 594/12.

Liberty and Others v. the United Kindgom, [2008], ECtHR, N 58243/00.

S. and Marper v. the United Kingdom, [2008], ECtHR, N 30562/04, 30566/04.

Weber and Saravia v. Germany, [2006], ECtHR, N 54934/00.

Amann v. Switzerland, [2000], ECtHR, N 27798/95.

Klass and Others v. Germany, [1978], ECtHR, N 5029/71.



How to Cite

Kukava, K. (2023). Balancing the Right to Privacy and National Security Interests in the Digital Age. Journal of Law, (2), 338–353 (Geo) 297.