Mass surveillance and data protection in the digital age

Safronova Elena, Oganesian Tigran, Nikonovich Sergei, Koroleva Ekaterina, Bocharov Alexander


The article considers the legitimacy of mass surveillance in the context of international human rights law and the existing mechanisms of protection of the right to respect for private life. The author notes that the problems concerning the protection of personal data of millions of people from mass surveillance should be solved both at the national and international levels. In this regard, covert surveillance is even more important in the context of the development of the Internet, as it is based on the creation of programmes and methods for monitoring the transmission of information online. Special attention is paid to data protection in global social networks, which are vulnerable and store personal data of billions of people. The article provides examples of case-law of the court of justice of the EU and the ECtHR on the protection of personal data. Further, based on the examples of some countries, the prospects for the creation of a new international instrument for the regulation of surveillance are outlined and an attempt is made to identify the role of European countries and Russia in this process.


data protection; mass surveillance; human rights; Internet

Full Text:



Bernal Paul. Data gathering, surveillance and human rights: recasting the debate, Journal of Cyber Policy, 2016. 1:2, Р. 244.

Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms as amended by Protocols No. 11 and No. 14. Rome, 4 November 1950. ETS No. 5.

Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data. Strasbourg, 28 January 1981. ETS No. 108.

Convention on Cybercrime. Budapest, 23 November 2001. ETS No. 185.

CJEU. Breyer v. Germany. 19.10.16.

CJEU, C-131/12, Google Spain SL, Google Inc. v. Agencia Española de Protección de Datos (AEPD), Mario Costeja González [GC], 13 May 2014, paras. 55–58.

Digital Rights Ireland and Seitlinger and Others, Joined Cases C-293/12 and C-594/12, Court of Justice of the European Union (8 April 2014).

ECtHR, Malone v. the United Kingdom, no. 8691/79, 2 August 1984.

ECtHR, Klass and Others v. Germany, no. 5029/71, 6 September 1978.

ECtHR, Leander v. Sweden, no. 9248/81, 26 March 1987.

ECtHR, Roman Zakharov v. Russia [GC], no. 47143/06, 4 December 2015, § 244.

ECtHR, Shimovolos v. Russia, no. 3194/09, 21 June 2011.

European Commission, Code of Conduct on countering illegal hate speech online: First results on implementation (December 2016).

European Union, Internet Referral Unit, Year One Report, sect. 4.11; submissions by European Digital Rights (EDRi), p. 1 and Access Now, pp. 2−3.

Facebook report to the us Senate. June 8, 2018. URL:

John Perry Barlow, A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace, 8 February 1996.

Orwell George. 1984. M: Progress. 1989.

PACE Resolution 2045 (2015), § 11. URL:

Protocol amending the Convention for the protection of individuals with regard to the automatic processing of personal data (CED No. 108). Will be open for signature from 25 June 2018.

Results of the public opinion Fund (FOP) survey among Russian citizens aged 18 and older on April 7, 2013. URL:

Rydzak Jan. Disconnected: A Human Rights-Based Approach to Network Disruptions // Global Network Initiative (GNI). 2018. P. 9.

Special Eurobarometer 431. Data protection. P.4. URL:

The rule of law on the Internet and in the wider digital world. Issue paper published by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights. December 2014. P.22. URL:

The Internet of Things: Cayla doll is banned in Germany over privacy and security concerns. URL:


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Revista Publicando.

Licencia de Creative Commons


This Content is available under licencia de Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0 Internacional.