Avenue de l'Europe
R.V. and Others v. the Netherlands 
| 1991
The applicants were the subjects of secret surveillance by the intelligence and security services … the information gathered on them comprises personal information and is kept in records.
Report by the European Commission of Human Rights
R.V. lived in Utrecht and worked as a postman. He discovered that, along with almost 200 others, he was kept under secret surveillance by a group of government security services. The civilians were allegedly being monitored because they were part of the Peace Movement.
R.V. and others asked to see the information which had been collected about them. They claimed that it could have harmful effects on their future employment, and could be easily stolen. Their requests were all refused.
The body which used to help the Strasbourg court assess cases, the European Commission of Human Rights, found that the applicants’ right to privacy had been violated. The law covering security and intelligence activities had been extremely broad. It had not specified who could be monitored, the conditions under which the surveillance must operate, limits on the powers of the security services or a system to supervise them.
In 2002, a new law clearly set out who could be subject to secret surveillance, the circumstances when this could take place and the methods which could be used. It also set up a procedure for people to request access to the information which had been gathered about them.
Gracinda Maria Antunes Rocha would never have started her new job had she known that she would be placed under surveillance to get security clearance. The European Court of Human Rights found that the Portuguese authorities had breached her right to privacy. Portugal responded to the judgment by bringing in a new law allowing victims to get justice more easily in such circumstances.
Jacques and Janine Huvig were a retired couple who had run a fruit-and-vegetable business. Police tapped their phone and listened to their conversations. At the time, investigators had almost limitless powers to tap the phones of almost anyone for almost any reason. The European court ruled that there must be clear legal limits and safeguards to protect people’s privacy – leading to a change in...
Jürgen Buck ran a small business in a town near Frankfurt. One afternoon police suddenly raided his house and office. Jürgen alleged that suspicions were raised locally that he was involved in crime, leading to a loss of business. Yet the raid had merely been an unnecessary step in proceedings against Jürgen’s son for speeding. The European court ruled that the raid had been disproportionate.
Netherlands
Portugal
France
Germany