Electronic Surveillance as a Mechanism for the Investigation of Corruption Crimes: Between the Requirements of Protection of Rights and Freedoms and the Necessity of Detecting Crimes
Dr. Abdelalli Haha Dr. Amel Tamam
Associate Professor of Public Law – Vice Dean of Postgraduate Studies – Scientific Research and External Relations – Faculty of Law and Political Science – University of Biskra – Algeria
Dr. Amel Tamam
Associate Professor of Public Law – (Administrative Law) – Faculty of Law and Political Science – University of Biskra – Algeria
This study addresses electronic surveillance as one of the modern methods of special investigation into corruption crimes, and how it affects individual rights and freedom, which is the main issue of this paper. The importance of this subject is highlighted in view of the considerable jurisprudential and legislative debate that has arisen. Although some still do not recognize its legitimacy, the greater part of jurisprudence and comparative legislation, in the same way as the Algerian legislation, believe that electronic surveillance, although a serious measure affecting individual rights and freedoms and violates the inviolability of private life, is a means imposed by the development of information and communication technologies, and which the state must harness and exploit in combating crime.
In order to understand all the elements of this subject, this study has been divided into three axes. The first is devoted to the general provisions of corruption and electronic surveillance. The second focuses on tracing the impact of electronic surveillance on rights and freedoms. The Third discusses the regulations of restricting rights and freedoms. This research was based mainly on the analytical approach through the diagnosis and analysis of the content of the substantive and procedural Algerian laws relating to electronic surveillance, with the use of Kuwaiti, UAE and French legislation for comparison.
Finally, we ended with a number of conclusions and recommendations, the most important being the agreement of most of the comparative legislations on the necessity of reconciling the right of the State to use these dangerous means as a way of detecting corruption crimes, and the right of individuals to protect their rights and freedoms. We also found that the balancing of these conflicting rights requires the provision of a number of substantive and procedural guarantees, the most important of which is that electronic surveillance is used for investigation in a corruption offence and requires a court order.
Keywords: Interception of correspondence, eavesdropping, taking pictures, right to privacy, substantive guarantees.