Back Slovakia

    Status regarding Budapest Convention

Status regarding Budapest Convention

Status : Party Declarations and reservations : Reservations regarding Art. 4, 29, 42. Declarations regarding Art. 2, 40. See legal profile

Cybercrime policies/strategies

The cyber security document for Slovakia covers the period 2015-2020: Cyber Security Concept of the Slovak Republic. Its strategic goal is to achieve an open, secure, and protected national cyber space, i.e. building trust in the reliability and security of critical information and communication infrastructure, as well as building of certainty that this will perform its functions and serve national interests also in cases of cyber attacks. It addresses thus primarily cyber security aspects. (Source:

Specialised institutions

  • Cybercrime Division of Presidium of Police Force – specialised unit with focus on fight against cybercrime
  • Interpol – 24/7 Contact Point for the purposes of Art. 35 Budapest Convention, competent to send/receive requests.
  • Multidisciplinary integrated group of experts for cybercrime – multidisciplinary group which discusses legislative and practical issues related to cybercrime
  • A prosecutor of International unit of the General Prosecutor’s Office is member of European judicial cybercrime network within EUROJUST
  • Regulatory Authority for Electronic Communications and Postal Services -   the national regulatory authority and pricing authority in the sector of electronic communications and postal service

Jurisprudence/case law

The Constitutional Court of the Slovak Republic proclaimed the mass surveillance of citizens as unconstitutional. More specifically, on 23 April 2014, the Slovak Constitutional Court preliminary suspended effectiveness of the Slovak implementation of Data Retention Directive, which was repealed as invalid by the Court of Justice of the European Union

On 29 April 2015, The Grand Chamber of the Constitutional Court (PL. ÚS 10/2014) proclaimed provisions § 58(5) to (7) and § 63(6) of the Electronic Communications Act (Act No. 351/2011 Coll.), which until now required mobile network providers to track the communication of their users, as well as provisions of § 116 of the Criminal Code (Act No. 301/2005 Coll.) and § 76(3) of the Police Force Act (Act No. 171/1993 Coll.), which allowed access to this data, to be in contradiction to the constitutionally guaranteed rights of citizens to privacy and personal data. As a consequence, these provisions lost their binding effect.

According to now invalid provisions of the Electronic Communications Act, the providers of electronic communications were obliged to store traffic data, localization data and data about the communicating parties for a period of 6 months (in the case Internet, email or Voice over Internet Protocol communication) or for a period of 12 months (in case of other communication).

Hence, data about who, for how long, when, how and from where the communication was made, has been stored. Data about unsuccessful calls was also stored to the same extent.

The Constitutional Court concluded that contested law requiring general data retention for the purposes of their disclosure to competent public authorities continued to pursue legitimate general interest objective of fighting serious crime and public security.

This fact, of itself, is according to the Constitutional Court, not sufficient to pronounce accordance with constitutional law of Slovak Republic. Analysis of data retention and possibility of their combination and connection with other data permitted to uncover substantial part of privacy of individuals in question. Such reality together with lasting, systematic and global character of data collection was in the awareness of persons concerned able to cause an impression that their private life was subjected to permanent surveillance.

After the decision of the Constitutional Court, the Slovak Republic has amended provisions of respective Acts that were declared invalid to that extent that the global character of data retention was revoked (for all types of data: location data, traffic data, content of conveyed messages). 

Tools on Cybercrime & Electronic Evidence Empowering You!

These profiles do not necessarily reflect official positions of the States covered or of the Council of Europe. 


  Are you aware of the latest legislative or policy developments on cybercrime and electronic evidence?

  Share this information with us helping to keep this platform up to date.

Useful links