In 2016, the Polish Parliament adopted the Act to Amend the Act on the Police and Certain Other Laws (Act of 15 January 2016) and the Act on Anti-Terrorist Activities (Anti-Terrorism Act). These acts were criticized, in particular by non-governmental organizations, which considered that the new provisions, under the guise of implementing the Constitutional Tribunal’s judgment, strengthened the powers of the authorities in the field of secret surveillance and were incompatible with a number of Polish human rights commitments. The applicants were the President of the Warsaw Bar Association and four employees and experts of the Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights. In 2017, the applicants lodged complaints with the Prime Minister and with the heads of the police and the various special services concerning certain provisions governing secret surveillance. In particular, they criticized the fact that, in their view, the impugned provisions authorized the officials in question to monitor their communications and to collect data about them without their knowledge. Because of their professional and public activities, they considered they were highly likely to be subjected to secret surveillance. Furthermore, the services in question were not required to inform them of any secret surveillance carried out, even after it had ceased. They also maintained that the situation was incompatible with Article 51 of the Constitution and did not allow judicial review of the lawfulness of surveillance and that, in addition, the refusal to inform individuals that they had been subject to secret surveillance, combined with the lack of effective review and the inadequacies of the national rules at issue, were incompatible with the democratic rule-of-law state and prejudiced their legitimate interests. The applicants received replies from the authorities, including the relevant departments of the Office of the Prime Minister, who informed them that heads of the police and the various special services had provided complete replies to their requests concerning possible secret surveillance. These replies stated that, in the performance of their duties, the special services applied secret-surveillance measures provided for by the legislation in force and that the methods and measures taken for that purpose were secret and protected by the rules governing the functioning of the services concerned and by the Act on the Protection of Personal Data.

This review of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights presents the most significant judgments and decisions issued by the European Court of Human Rights in the period from April to June 2024, concerning: obligation to respect human rights, right to life, right to liberty and security, right to a fair trial, right to respect for private and family life, freedom of expression, prohibition of discrimination, individual applications.