The Ombudsman reports that protesters, including minors, have been asked to unlock their phones and allow the checking of personal data. Lawyers and civil society representatives consider the checking without the necessary authorization as a violation of the law and the right to privacy.
In late September, Prime Minister Edi Rama warned that the mobile phone could no longer be treated as an open door for the state to the private lives of citizens. He called it “the archive of a person’s life” and promised new legal guarantees to protect it from arbitrary controls.
Three weeks later, as police attempted to quell the unrest that accompanied protests against his government, some of the detained young people, including minors, said that officers had asked them to unlock their phones and expose their personal content, without a court order.
The evidence, reported by the Ombudsman, has raised questions about the legality of the police actions and highlighted the gap between the privacy guarantees that the government promises to enshrine in law – which, critics say, are intended to protect senior officials under investigation by SPAK – and the way the authorities exercise their power over citizens on the streets.
Footage shared on social media during recent protests in Tirana shows police officers confiscating the mobile phones of detained individuals, raising questions about the legal basis for these actions and the limits of police powers. The episodes come amid criticism of the disproportionate use of force against protesters, including minors, and the way police intervene during detentions.
Reports that protesters were asked to unlock their devices without clear legal authorization raise questions about whether police acted within their powers under the law. In a report on Tuesday on the human rights situation during the protests, the Ombudsman said one of the alleged violations involved police efforts to search the phones of detained protesters.
“Some minors and adults reported being asked to unlock their mobile phones and allow their personal data to be checked, without a court order, even when there was no charge filed by the prosecution,” said Ahmet Prençi, commissioner and head of the National Mechanism for the Prevention of Torture. The institution notes that the right to private life and correspondence is protected by Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and that interferences with this right must have a legal basis, be necessary and proportionate.
Criminal procedures also provide for conditions for the control and seizure of electronic data, setting limits on the way in which authorities can access the contents of personal devices. The legality of such an action depends on the specific circumstances, the competences of the proceeding body and the authorizations required by law. If these conditions are not met, the control may constitute unlawful interference in private life. Civil society representatives warn that the control of protesters’ mobile phones by the police, without the necessary legal authorization, may constitute unlawful interference in privacy and a violation of criminal proceedings. Attorney Gent Serjani, director of the Center for Social Justice, points out that the legality of these actions depends on the legal basis and respect for procedures.
“Taking a mobile phone and checking the photos, videos or other private content contained on it, without the appropriate legal authorization and without respecting the procedures provided for by the legislation in force, may constitute unlawful interference in private life,” he told BIRN, adding that the legality of these actions must be assessed based on the specific circumstances, the legal competences of the proceeding bodies and the authorizations required by law. According to Serjani, the right to respect for private life and the protection of personal data is guaranteed by Albanian legislation and international human rights instruments.
“For this reason, any interference by public authorities in this right must have a legal basis, pursue a legitimate aim and be in accordance with the principle of proportionality,” he stressed. For Rigels Xhemollari, from the Civic Resistance Center, these actions clearly constitute an excess of powers by the police and a matter that requires investigation by the prosecution and accountability for the actions taken.
"A violation of criminal procedure and there should be a chain investigation by the prosecution as the police have exceeded their powers without a court decision," he said.
"The police have emerged from the wells of the law, they are operating on political orders, and only with judicial decisions and examples of punishment can the rule of law be returned," Xhemollari concluded./BIRN
