EDPL - European Data Protection Law Review

«
1
»

The search returned 2 results.

Annelies Vandendriessche

European Data Protection Law Review, Volume 4 (2018), Issue 4, Page 483 - 491

With recent whistleblower scandals shaking the European Union (EU), the plight of whistleblowers has received renewed attention from the public and policymakers, leading the European Commission to launch a Proposal for a Directive on the Protection of Persons Reporting Breaches of Union Law. This article analyses recent jurisprudential and legislative developments in the legal protection of whistleblowers in the EU. Solutions offered by jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights are examined, as well as their adaptability to national law, taking the Luxembourgish courts’ approach in the LuxLeaks case as an example. When comparing these jurisprudential solutions to the solutions offered by the Directive Proposal, a convergence was observed between the jurisprudential and legislative approach to whistleblower protection. The Directive Proposal successfully further refined the jurisprudential criteria for whistleblower protection into more concrete legislation. The current-day convergence of both sources of protection could contribute to developing effective legal protection and strengthening legal certainty for whistleblowers in the EU. Keywords: Whistleblower Protection, Proposal for a Directive on the Protection of Persons Reporting Breaches of Union Law, Guja v Moldova, LuxLeaks

Mark D Cole, Annelies Vandendriessche

European Data Protection Law Review, Volume 2 (2016), Issue 1, Page 121 - 129

Roman Zakharov v Russia (App no 47143/06) and Szabó and Vissy v Hungary (App no. 37138/14) In the past months, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has decided two major cases concerning issues of national mass surveillance measures. In Roman Zakharov v Russia of December 2015 the Grand Chamber and in Szabó and Vissy v Hungary of January 2016 the Fourth Section of the Strasbourg Court twice in short notice responded to individual applications made under Article 34 of the Convention regarding violations of the right to respect for private life and correspondence according to Article 8 of the Convention. Beyond the significant findings concerning these types of surveillance measures, the cases are noteworthy in view of the interplay between the ECtHR and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in relation to the right to privacy.

«
1
»

News

Current Issue