The Duration for Conducting Covert Investigative Actions as a Criterion for Determining the Intensity of Interference with the Right to Personal Life
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.60131/jlaw.1.2025.9284Keywords:
Covert investigative actions, The Inviolability of Private Life, Protected sphere, List of Crimes.Abstract
The duration prescribed by the Criminal Procedure Code for conducting covert investigative actions is applicable in the context of fair balancing and harmonization of public and private interests. During covert investigative activities, intense interference occurs with the rights protected by the Constitution. The validity period is the criterion that determines the intensity of the intervention.
The paper aims to present alternative ways to change the content of criminal procedural numbers. On the one hand, it demonstrates the risks posing increased interference with the implementation of covert investigative action, and on the other hand, the work discusses the ways to solve the problem. Taking into account the time limits and the list of crimes that allow for the performance of these actions, the legislative requirement for the use of covert investigative actions as an extreme measure shall be observed.
In a legal state, the personal space of every person should be protected and inviolable. The legislative guarantees ensure that a legitimate goal in a democratic society is achieved not to violating the principle of a legal state.
References
Constitution of Georgia, Legislative Herald of Georgia, 24/08/1995.
International Pact on Civil and Political Rights, Legislative Herald of Georgia, 16/12/1966.
Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia, Legislative Herald of Georgia, 09/10/2009.
Akubardia I., Control mechanisms on covert investigative activities, Revaz Gogshelidze - 65th Anniversary Collection, ‘‘Meridiani‘‘, 2022.
Bichia M., Protection of Personal Life in accordance with the Civil Law of Georgia, Tbilisi, 2012.
Bichia is M., the idea of protecting personal life from the origin to the present, Revaz Gogshelidze - 65th Anniversary Collection, ‘‘Meridiani‘‘, 2022.
Zoidze B., "To understand the practical existence of law: primarily from the perspective of human rights", Tbilisi, 2013.
Izoria L., "Restriction of Human Rights and the Principle of Moderation, Protection of Human Rights in National and International Law", Tbilisi, 2002.
Kublashvili K."Fundamental Human Rights and Freedoms", Fifth Edition, ed. "World of Lawyers", Tbilisi, 2019. (in Georgian)
Loladze B., Pirtskhalaishvili A., Basic Rights, Comment, Tbilisi, 2023.
Mezvrishvili N., in the book - Commentary of the Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia, Group of Authors, ed. "Meridiani", Tbilisi, 2015. (in Georgian)
Meurmishvili B., Covert Investigative Actions, in the book - Criminal Procedure Law of Georgia, Private Part. Tbilisi, ed. “Meridiani“, 2017. (in Georgian)
Trechel S., Human Rights in Criminal Proceedings, Oxford University Press, Tbilisi, 2009.
Khodel M., Covert Surveillance of Telephone Conversations in Criminal Proceedings (According to Georgian and German Law), Tbilisi, 2019.
Decision No 2/2/1428 of the Constitutional Court of Georgia of 15 July 2021 on the case "Koba Todua v. the Parliament of Georgia".
Decision No 3/3/600 of 17 May 2017 of the Constitutional Court of Georgia on the case "Citizen of Georgia Kakha Kukava v. the Parliament of Georgia".
Decision No 2/2/516,542 of the Constitutional Court of Georgia of 14 May 2013 on the case "Citizens of Georgia - Aleksandre Baramidze, Lasha Tughushi, Vakhtang Khmaladze and Vakhtang Maisaia v. the Parliament of Georgia".
Decision of the Constitutional Court of February 29, 2012, on the case N2/1/484 in the case "Georgian Young Lawyers' Association and Georgian Citizen Tamar Khidasheli v. the Parliament of Georgia".
Decision No 3/1/512 of 26 June 2012 of the Constitutional Court of Georgia on the case "Danish citizen Heike Chronicle v. the Parliament of Georgia".
Decision N1/2/519 of the Constitutional Court of Georgia of October 24, 2012, on the case "Georgian Young Lawyers' Association and Citizen of Georgia Tamar Chugoshvili v. the Parliament of Georgia".
Ruling of the Constitutional Court of June 10, 2009, on the case N1/2/458 "Citizens of Georgia - Davit Sartania and Aleksandre Macharashvili v. the Parliament of Georgia and the Ministry of Justice of Georgia".
Decision No 1/2/384 of the Constitutional Court of July 2, 2007 on the case "Citizens of Georgia – Davit Jimsheleishvili, Tariel Gvetadze and Neli Dalalishvili v. the Parliament of Georgia".
Decision of the Constitutional Court of December 26, 2007 on N1/3/407 case "Georgian Young Lawyers' Association and Citizen of Georgia – Ekaterine Lomtatidze v. the Parliament of Georgia".
Code de procédure pénale, légifrance, 31.12.1957.
Albrecht H. J., Dorsch C., & Krüpe C. R., Effizienz der Überwachung der Telekommunikation nach den §§ 100a, 100b StPO und anderer verdeckter Ermittlungsmaßnahmen. Max-Planck-Institut für ausländisches und internationales Strafrecht, Freiburg, 2003.
Craven Jr, J. B., "Personhood: The Right to Be Alone.", Duke Law Journal, 1976.
Dorsch C., Effizienz der Überwachung der Telekommunikation nach den §§ 100a, 100b StPO, Freiburg, Schriftreihe des Max-Planck-Instituts für ausländisches und internationales Strafrecht, 2005.
Van Kempen P. H., Criminal justice and the ultima ratio principle: Need for limitation, exploration and consideration. Overuse in the criminal justice system. On criminalization, prosecution and imprisonment/Le recours excessif au système de justice pénale. Aux sanctions pénales, aux poursuites pénales et la détention, Cambridge/Antwerp/Chicago: Intersentia, 2019.
Von Gierke O., Deutsches Privatrecht, Band 1, Allgemeiner Teil und Personenrecht, Vol. 1. Duncker & Humblot, 1895.
Melander S., Ultima ratio in European criminal law, European Criminal Law Review, Vol. 3, N1, 2013.
Schwartz P. M., Evaluating Telecommunications Surveillance in Germany: The Lessons of the Max Planck Institute's Study. George Washington Law Review, 72, 2003.
Romanchenko and Kharazishvili v. Georgia, [ECtHR], App. Nos. 33067/22 and 37832/22, February 18, 2025.
Roman Zakharov v. Russia, [ECtHR] , App. No 47143/06, December 4, 2015.
Kennedy v. United Kingdom, [ECtHR], App. No. 26839/05, 18 May, 2010.
Kopp v. Switzerland, [ECtHR], App. No. 23224/94, March 25, 1998.
Leander v Sweden [ECtHR] , App. No 9248/81, 26 March 1987.
Democracy Research Institute (DRI), Operative-Technical Agency Mandate in Carrying out Covert Investigative Actions, Risks and Challenges, 2020.
Explanatory card on the draft constitutional law of Georgia "On Amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia", <https://info.parliament.ge/file/1/BillReviewContent/298437?> [26.02.2025].
Submission of the President of Georgia N07-1/14; 23.06.2022, https://info.parliament.ge/file/1/BillPackageContent/35447? [26.02.2025].
Conclusion of the Legal Issues Committee on the Motivated Remarks of the President of Georgia on Amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia (June 7, 2022, N1614-VIIIm-XMP) on the Motivated Remarks of the President of Georgia (N07-1/14; 23.06.2022); https://info.parliament.ge/file/1/BillReviewContent/304789? [26.02.2025].
Venice Commission, Urgent opinion on the Draft Law on the Amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code adopted by the Parliament of Georgia on 7 June 2022, Opinion no. 1092/2022.
Report of the Special Rapporteur "On the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression", 17.04.2013, 2, https://shorturl.at/ek258 [26.02.2025].
General Assembly, United Nations, Resolution on "The Right to Privacy in The Digital Age", https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N13/449/47/PDF/N1344947.pdf?OpenElement 21.01.2014, [26.02.2025].
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
