Telecommunication

Full reference: CJEU, Grand Chamber, 6th of October 2020, Privacy International c/ Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, C-623/17. Read the judgment  Read the summary of the judgment (in French) Read the opinion of the Advocate General  Read the reference for a preliminary ruling from the Investigatory Powers Tribunal – London (United Kingdom)

Full reference: Frison-Roche, M.-A., Being obliged by Law to unlock telephone is not equivalent to self-incrimination: Cour de cassation, Criminal Chamber, Dec. 19, 2019, Newsletter MAFR – Law, Compliance, Regulation, 21st of August 2020 Read by freely subscribing the other news of the Newsletter MAFR – Law, Compliance, Regulation   Summary of the news The Cour de Cassation (French Supreme Judicial Court) made a decision on 19th of December 2019 about a case concerning a refusal to communicate his mobile phone's unlock code to the police while the police found him with a significant quantity of narcotic and a lot of cash and that there was a certain probability that this mobile phone get proofs of culpability of its owner. The individual was indicted not for narcotic trafficking but for not having communicate its unlock code which constitute an offense to article 434-15-2 of code pénal, from the loi du 3 juin 2018 renforçant la lutte contre la criminalité organisée, et le terrorisme et leur financement (law reinforcing organized crime, terrorisme and their financing). The accused invokes before the court its right to not incriminate oneself. Indeed, the configuration face to policemen was such that if he refused to communicate its unlock code, he will be punished because of this obligation to communicate his code and that if he accepted, he will also be sanctioned because of the proofs contained into the mobile phone. Such a configuration therefore offered him no alternative to confessing, which is contrary to the European Convention on Human Rights and to European and national jurisprudence. Face to such a case, the Cour de Cassation chose to segment the information and proposed the following solution: if the researched information cannot be obtained regardless of the suspect willingness, it is not possible to constraint this person to communicate this information without violating its procedural rights, but if the information can be obtained regardless of the suspect willingness then the individual is obliged to communicate his code. In the current case, as it was possible for policemen to obtain information contained in the phone by technical means, longer but existent, then the refuse of communication of the unlock code by the suspect constitute an obstruction that should be sanctioned.  Such a decision is an exemple of the conciliation by the judge of two fundamental but contradictory "monumental goals" of Compliance Law: transparency of information towards public authorities and very sensible personal data protection.  ​To go further, read Marie-Anne Frison-Roche's working paper: Rethinking the world from the notion of data    

Political power has often difficulties, or takes a long time to admit the principles of law, such as express the judges. So it was quite certain that the penalty proceedings held before the Autorité de Régulation des Communications Electroniques et de la Poste -ARCEP  (French Regulatory Authority for Electronic Communications and Post, as the investigation body and the judgment body were not sufficiently distinct crumpled the constitutional principle of impartiality. It was acquired about 15 years. Yet the organization has continued. It has been enough that an operator has been sanctioned. He used the procedure of Question Prioritairre de Constitutionnalité -Q.P.C.  Priority Question of Constitutionality) and Numéricable July 5, 2013 decision by the Constitutional Council came to declare that any sanction proceedings before ARCEP unconstitutional, because of objective procedural partialité, thus causing difficulty to the regulator. It took until the 0rdonnance of March 12, 2014 and finally the decree of 1st August 2014 to organize an efficient sanctions procedure, making this time an intern wall within the ARCEP between the services responsible for the instruction and those which are responsible for judging. The great judge Pierre Drai used to say: "Ne pas respecter le droit coûte cher (Do not respect the law is expensive)". We see here that this is true also for the Government which writes laws and regulations. So, for months, the regulator has been without power, to the delight of the operators, who often are tacticians or turbulent.

To read the decree, in French . To read the modifications of the Code des postes et des communications électroniques.[ French […]

Translated Summaries ENGLISH Two and a half years after having been established by the LME, the French Competition Authority has uncontestably acquired its “place in the sun” amongst the competition authorities of other countries, as demonstrated by multiple indicators.   ITALIAN Articolo: L’Autorità garante della concorrenza tra “regolazione” e politica in materia di concorrenza Due anni e mezzo dopo l’instaurazione da parte del LME, l’Autorità francese garante della libera concorrenza ha trovato il suo posto tra le diverse autorità degli altri paesi, così come è stato dimostrato da diversi indicatori. SPANISH Artículo: La Autoridad de la competencia, entre “regulación” y política competitiva.   Después de dos años y medio de haber sido establecido por el LME, la Autoridad francesa de la competencia ha incontestablemente adquirido su “lugar bajo el sol” entre las autoridades de la competencia de otros países, como demostrado por varios indicadores. ………………… Other translations forthcoming.

ENGLISH Competition is the principle element of markets, in the princely sense of the term.The relationships that regulation maintains with competition are ambiguous. It is important to eliminate this ambiguity in order to reveal the ab initio opposition between regulation and competition, to shed light upon the dialectics between both of them. Indeed, regulation may aim at building competition, and is thereby presented as a tool that will cease being used when the competitive market functions effectively. Administration – Autorité de Régulation des Communications électroniques et des Postes – Competition – Competition Authority – Conflict of intersts – Consumer – Contract – Equilibrium – European Commission – Ex ante / Ex post – Government – Hayek – Horyzontal regulation – Information asymmetry – Liberalisation – Market failure – Natural economic monopoly – Online gambling – Political mandate – Postal services – Power – Principle – Real economy – “Réglementation” – Regulator – Regulatory Authority – Self regulation – symmetrical regulation – Telecommunication – Tool – Watchdog * * In The Journal of Regulation, these keywords are done by the Editor and not by the Author.   PORTUGUESE Artigo: Regulação versus Concorrência Concorrência é o principal elemento dos mercados, no mais genuíno sentido da palavra. As relações que regulação mantém com a concorrência são ambíguas. É importante eliminar essa ambiguidade de modo a relativizar a oposição ab initio entre regulação e concorrência, para trazer luz para a dialética entre elas. Com efeito, regulação pode tender a construir a concorrência, e é então apresentada como uma ferramenta que deixará de ser usada quando o mercado competitivo passar a funcionar realmente. Administração – Autorité de Régulation des Communications électroniques et des Postes – Concorrência – Autoridade de concorrência – Conflito de interesse – Consumidor – Contrato – Equilíbrio – Comissão Europeia – Ex ante / Ex post – Governo – Hayek – Regulação horizontal – Informação assimétrica – Liberalização – Falha de mercado – Monopólio econômico natural – Jogo em linha – Mandato político – Serviços postais – Poder – Princípio – Economia real – Regulamentação – Regulador – Autoridade de regulação – Auto-regulação – Regulação simétrica – Telecomunicações – Ferramenta – Observador* * No Journal of Regulation, as palavras-chave são fornecidas pelo Diretor, e não pelo Autor. ITALIAN Articolo: Regolazione vs. Concorrenza La concorrenza è il principio fondamentale dei mercati, nel senso stretto del termine. Le relazioni tra regolazione e concorrenza sono ambigue. Per rivelare il contrasto tra regolazione e concorrenza è importante cancellare questa ambiguità e chiarire la dinamica di questi due concetti. In effetti, la regolazione punta a sviluppare la concorrenza ed è spesso considerata uno strumento che non avrà più ragion d’essere una volta che il mercato funzionerà in libera concorrenza. Amministrazione – Asimmetria dell’informazione – Autoregolazione – Autorità di regolazione – Autorité de Régulation des Communications électroniques et des Postes – Autorità garante della concorrenza – Commissione Europea – Concorrenza – Conflitto di interessi – Contratto – Consumatore – Economia reale – Equilibrio – Ex ante / Ex post – Governo – Hayek – Liberalizzazione – Mancato Funzionamento del mercato – Monopolio economico naturale – Mandato politico – Potere – Principio – “Regolamentazione” – Regolatore – Regolazione orizzontale – Regolazione simmetrica – Servizi postali – Scommesse online – Strumento – Telecomunicazioni – Vigilanza * * In The Journal of Regulation, le parole chiave sono responsabilità dell’Editore e non dall’Autore.   SPANISH Artículo: Regulación versus la competencia La competencia es el elemento principal de los mercados, en precisamente el sentido de este término. Es importante eliminar esta ambigüedad para poder revelar la posición ab initio entre la regulación y la competencia, para poder traer a luz las dialécticas entre las dos. Así tanto, la regulación puede intentar construir la competencia, y es, por consiguiente, un instrumento que cesará de ser utilizado cuando el mercado competitivo funcione de manera eficaz.     Other translations forthcoming.