Thread by @TC_IntLaw

The new CJEU #dataretention judgment in #Dwyer is rich & interesting. Still reading it but just a few 1st quick observations. First, CJEU clearly rejects @EU_Commission proposal for some flexibility by introducing a “tertium genus of infringements” to deal wth serious crime 1/n

https://twitter.com/eucourtpress/status/1511245698771173379

It should be reminded that @EU_Commission, in order to satisfy the operational needs 🇪🇺Law Enforcement Agencies, proposed to equate some serious crimes to the level of gravity of “a serious threat to national security” for which CJEU permits general #dataretention.
Read 2/n
👇

https://twitter.com/TC_IntLaw/status/1461628130834239491

CJEU clearly rejects such an idea of an intermediate category between national security & public security. It maintains that there is a strict hierarchy bt national security on the one hand & all other legitimate aims on the other, incl. fighting most serious forms of crime 3/n

The CJEU also clearly rejects ‘philosopher's stone’ invented in April 2021 by 🇫🇷 @Council_of_State: that it would be possible to access metadata retained due to an "existing threat to national security" for the purpose of combating serious crime. 4/n

https://twitter.com/tc_intlaw/status/1385515721153777664

As a counterpart, CJEU provides lots of precisions & flexibility re/ various permissible exceptions to fight serious crime. It seems to authorize #dataretention for vast geographical areas (entire cities if high crime?) & places with lots of visitors. Big discussions ahead… 5/5

The more I think about it, the more I am afraid that the “geo-exceptions” opened by the Court are unworkable & problematic… 🤔
👇

https://twitter.com/tc_intlaw/status/1511305132184588291

Here is also an article by @EURACTIV_FR @MathieuPollet_ wth @TC_IntLaw & @AlexArchambault inside
👇
euractiv.fr/section/econom…