DATIFICAÇÃO E VIGILÂNCIA:
o judiciário é guardião dos direitos fundamentais na sociedade digital?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.30899/dfj.v16i46.1059Palavras-chave:
Sociedade digital, Estado de vigilância, Retórica de secutirização, JudiciárioResumo
A sociedade digital criou os instrumentos para a vigilância massiva dos indivíduos pelo Estado, sob a retórica da securitização. O medo do terror ou do extermínio estaria a justificar esse novo papel estatal. Se as leis deixam lacunas normativas e semânticas de controle, a servirem mais para legitimar do que para limitar os órgãos de inteligência, o Judiciário parece ainda atordoado em meio aos novos desafios e tentações de vigilância, e o seu papel de proteção dos direitos fundamentais.
Referências
AGAMBEN, Giorgio. Security and terror. Theory of Event, v. 5, n. 4, 2001. Disponível em: <https://philpapers.org/rec/AGASAT-3>. Acesso em: 5 abr. 2020.
ALEMANHA. BVerfGE 143, 1, de 20/9/2016b. Disponível em: < https://www.servat.unibe.ch/dfr/bv143001.html>. Acesso em: 11 fev. 2020.
ALEMANHA. Gesetz zur Ausland-Ausland-Fernmeldeaufklärung, 2016a. Disponível em: <https://www.bgbl.de/xaver/bgbl/start.xav#__bgbl__%2F%2F*%5B%40attr_id%3D%27bgbl116s3346.pdf%27%5D__1590194943323 >. Acesso em: 11 jan. 2020.
ALEMANHA. Gesetz zur Beschränkung des Brief-, Post- und Fernmeldegeheimn isses (G10/Artikel 10-Gesetz), 1968 (2017). Disponível em: < https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/g10_2001/>. Acesso em: 21 mar. 2020.
ALEMANHA. Tribunal Constitucional Federal. 1 BvR 2835/17, de 19/5/2020. Disponível em: <https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Entscheidungen/DE/2020/05/rs20200519_1bvr283517.html>. Acesso em 20 mai. 2020.
ARANTES, Rogério Bastos; KERCHE, Fábio. Judiciário e democracia no Brasil. Novos Estudos CEBRAP, n. 54, p. 27-411999.
ARGENTINA. Ley de inteligencia nacional (Ley 25.520), de 3/12/ 2001. Disponível em: < http://servicios.infoleg.gob.ar/infolegInternet/anexos/70000-74999/70496/norma.htm>. Acesso em 15 abr. 2020.
ÁUSTRIA. Disposição legal completa para a lei policial de segurança (versão consolidada maio de 2020) (Gesamte Rechtsvorschrift für Sicherheitspolizeigesetz, Fassung vom 16.05.2020). Disponível em: <https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/GeltendeFassung.wxe?Abfrage=Bundesnormen&Gesetzesnummer=10005792>. Acesso em: 15 mai. 2020.
BALZACQ, Thierry. The three faces of securitization: Political agency, audience and context. European journal of international relations, v. 11, n. 2, p. 171-201, 2005.
BENTHAM, Jeremy. The Panopticon Writings. London; New York : Verso, 2010 [1787].
BESSEGHINI, Maschietto M. Szabò and Vissy v. Hungary: a step back? Studio Legale, 5/12/2016. Disponível em: < https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=435b47eb-31a0-4240-b17a-27894e7fffd7>. Acesso em: 20 mai. 2020.
BUZAN, Barry; WÆVER, Ole; DE WILDE, Jaap. Security: a new framework for analysis. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1998.
CAMERON, Iain. National Security and the European Convention on Human Rights. The Hague: Kluwer Law; Martinus Nijhoff, 2000.
CASTELLS, Manuel. A Sociedade em Rede. Trad. Roneide Venacio Majer. 6ª edi. atual. São Paulo: Paz e Terra, 1999.
CHILE. Ley 19.974, de 2004. Disponível em: < https://www.leychile.cl/Navegar?idNorma=230999> Acesso em: 20 mar. 2020.
DE HERT, Paul; BOEHM, Franziska. The Rights of Notification after Surveillance Is over: Ready for Recognition. In BUS, Jacques et al (ed). Digital Enlightenment Yearbook 2012. IOS Press, 2012. Disponível em: <http://www.vub.ac.be/LSTS/pub/Dehert/408.pdf>.Acesso em: 11 mar. 2020.
DIXIT, Priya, Securitization and Terroristization: Analyzing States’ Usage of the Rhetoric of Terrorism In KOCH Bettina (ed). State Terror, State Violence. Global Perspectives. Springer VS, p 31-50, 2015.
DIXIT, Priya. Securitization and terroristization: analyzing states’ usage of the rhetoric of terrorism. In KOCH, Bettina (ed). State Terror, State Violence: Global Perspectives. Wiesbaden: Springer VS, p. 31-50, 2016.
DUNHAM, Ian M. Big Data: A Revolution That Will Transform How We Live, Work, and Think. The AAG Review of Books, v. 3, n. 1, p. 19-21, 2015.
ESLOVÊNIA. Lei da Agência Eslovena de Inteligência e Segurança (ZSOVA), 1999. Disponível em: <http://www.pisrs.si/Pis.web/pregledPredpisa?id=ZAKO1884>. Acesso em: 22 mar. 2020.
ESTADOS UNIDOS. 50 U.S. Code, update 2020. Disponível em: <https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1803>. Acesso em 20 abr. 2020.
ESTADOS UNIDOS. Privacy & Civil Liberties Oversight Board. Report on the Telephone Records Program Conducted under Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act and on the Operations of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. Washington, DC, 23/1/2014. Disponível em: < https://www.pclob.gov/library/215-Report_on_the_Telephone_Records_Program.pdf>. Acesso em 11 mar. 2020.
EUROPA. Corte Europeia de Direitos Humanos. 4a. Seção. Szabo and Vissy v. Hungary, j. 12/1/2016. Disponível em: < https://policehumanrightsresources.org/szabo-and-vissy-v-hungary-37138-14>. Acesso em: 11 abr. 2020.
FEATHERSTONE, Mike. Archiving cultures. British Journal of Sociology, v. 51, n. 1, p. 161-184, 2000.
FELDMAN, Shelley. Surveillance and Securitization. FELDMAN, Shelley; GEISLER, Charles C.; MENON, Gayatri A. (ed). Accumulating insecurity: violence and dispossession in the making of everyday life, Athens: University of Georgia Press, p. 185-212, 2011.
FRA - EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS. Surveillance by intelligence services: fundamental rights safeguards and remedies in the European Union, 2016. Disponível em: < https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2015/surveillance-intelligence-services-volume-i-member-states-legal-frameworks>. Acesso em: 11 mar. 2020.
FOUCAULT, Michel. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Vintage 1991.
GARNHAM, Nicholas. Europe and the Global Information Society: The History of a Troubled Relationship. Telematics and Informatics, v. 14, n. 4, p. 323-327, 1997.
GINSBURG, Tom. Beyond Judicial Review: Ancillary Powers of Constitutional Courts. In GINSBURG, Tom; KAGAN, Robert (eds). Institutions and public Law: Comparative approaches. New York: Peter Lang Publishing Inc, p. 225-244, 2005.
GRÉCIA. Lei 3649/2008. Disponível em: <http://www.nis.gr/npimages/docs/LAW_NUMBER%203649_en.pdf >. Acesso em 11 mar. 2020.
GYOLLAI, Daniel; KORKUT, Umut. Border Management and Migration Controls–Hungary report. 2019. Disponibilidade em: <https://uu.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1334555/FULLTEXT01.pdf>. Acesso em: 11 abr. 2020.
HUNGRIA. 1995. CXXV. Lei sobre serviços de segurança nacional (1995. évi CXXV. Törvény a nemzetbiztonsági szolgálatokról). Disponível em: <https://net.jogtar.hu/jogszabaly?docid=99500125.TV>. Acesso em: 11 abr. 2020.
IRLANDA. Interception of Postal Packets and Telecommunications Messages (Regulation) Act, 1993. Disponível em: <http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1993/act/10/enacted/en/print>. Acesso em: 11 mar. 2020.
LETÔNIA. Lei de Operações Investigatórias (Investigatory Operations Law), 1993. Disponível em: <https://likumi.lv/doc.php?id=57573>. Acesso em: 22 mar. 2020.
LOEBBECKE, Claudia; PICOT, Arnold. Reflections on societal and business model transformation arising from digitization and big data analytics: A research agenda. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, v. 24, n. 3, p. 149-157, 2015.
LYON, David. As apostas de Snowden: desafios para entendimento de vigilância hoje. Ciência e cultura, v. 68, n. 1, p. 25-34, 2016.
LYON, David. The electronic eye: The rise of surveillance society. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1994.
MANGET, Fred F. Intelligence and the Rise of Judicial Intervention. In JOHNSON, Loch K. (ed). Handbook of Intelligence Studies, London: Routledge, 2006, 329-342, 2006.
MARTIN, Allan. Digital literacy and the “digital society”. LANKSHEAR, Colin; KNOBEL, Michele (eds). Digital literacies: Concepts, policies and practices. New York Peter Lang, p. 151-176, 2008.
MAYER-SCHONBERGER, Viktor. Delete: the virtue of forgetting in the digital age. Princeton, Princeton University Press: 2009.
McINTYRE, T.J. Judicial Oversight of Surveillance: The Case of Ireland in Comparative Perspective. In SCHEININ, Martin; KRUNKE, Helle; AKSENOVA, Marina (eds.). Judges as Guardians of Constitutionalism and Human Rights. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, p. 136-172, 2016.
PAÍSES BAIXOS. Comissão de Poderes de Investigação (Toetsingscommissie Inzet Bevoegdheden – TIB), 2020a. Disponível em: < https://www.tib-ivd.nl/>. Acesso em 22 mar. 2020.
PAÍSES BAIXOS. Comissão de Revisão dos Serviços de Inteligência e Segurança (Commissie van Toezicht op de Inlichtingen- en Veiligheidsdiensten - CTIVD). Oversight 2020b. Disponível em: < https://english.ctivd.nl/oversight>. Acesso em 22 mar. 2020.
PODKOWIK, Jan. Privacy in the digital era – Polish electronic surveillance law declared partially unconstitutional: Judgment of the Constitutional Tribunal of Poland of 30 July 2014, K 23/11. European Constitutional Law Review, v.11, n. 3, p. 577-595, 2015.
POLÔNIA. Tribunal Constitucional. K 23/11, 30/7/2014. Disponível em: <http://prawo.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/download.xsp/WDU20140001055/O/D20141055.pdf>. Acesso em: 22 mar 2020.
PRIVACY INTERNATIONAL. Privacy International v. Secretary of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office et al. (UK Mass Surveillance / UK-US Intelligence Sharing), status: 2016. Disponível em: < https://privacyinternational.org/legal-case-files/1619/privacy-international-v-secretary-state-foreign-and-commonwealth-office-et-al>. Acesso em 20 fev. 2020.
REINO UNIDO. High Court of Justice. Queen’s Bench Division. Divisional Court. Liberty v. Secretary of State for the Home Department et al, j. 29/7/2019a. Disponível em: < https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Liberty-judgment-Final.pdf>. Acesso em 20 mar. 2020.
REINO UNIDO. Investigatory Powers Act 2016d. Disponível em: < http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2016/25/contents/enacted>. Acesso em: 22 mar. 2020.
REINO UNIDO. Investigatory Powers Tribunal. Liberty & Others v. the Security Service, SIS, GCHQ, IPT/13/77/H, j. 22/6/2015b. Disponível em: <https://www.ipt-uk.com/judgments.asp?id=27>. Acesso em 20 mar. 2020.
REINO UNIDO. Investigatory Powers Tribunal. News Group Newspapers Limited and Others v The Metropolitan Police Commissioner. IPT/14/176/8, j. 17/12/2015a. Disponível em: < https://www.ipt-uk.com/judgments.asp?id=30>. Acesso em 20 abr. 2020.
REINO UNIDO. Investigatory Powers Tribunal. News Privacy International v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No. 2) (Note) [2017] UKIPTrib 15_110-CH, j. 18/12/2017. Disponível em: <https://www.ipt-uk.com/docs/Privacy%20International%20v%20SSFCA%20and%20Ors%201%20December%202017.pdf>. Acesso em: 20 mar. 2020.
REINO UNIDO. Investigatory Powers Tribunal. News Privacy International v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2018] 2 All ER 166. Disponível em: < https://www.matrixlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Privacy-International-v-Secretary-of-State-for-Foreign-and-Commonwealth-Affairs-2018-UKIP-Trib-IPT-15-110-CH.pdf>. Acesso em: 20 mar. 2020.
REINO UNIDO. Investigatory Powers Tribunal. Privacy International v. Secretary of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office et al [2016] UKIPTrib 15_110-CH, j. 17/10/2016e. Disponível em: < https://www.ipt-uk.com/docs/Bulk_Data_Judgment.pdf>. Acesso em 20 mar. 2020.
REINO UNIDO. Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. Disponível em: < https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/23/section/67A>. Acesso em: 22 mar. 2020.
REINO UNIDO. Supreme Court. R (Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal and others. [2019] UKSC 22, j.15/5/2019b. Disponível em: < https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2018-0004.html>. Acesso em 11 mar. 2020.
REINO UNIDO. The Investigatory Powers Tribunal. Complaining, 5/7/2016a. Disponível em: <https://www.ipt-uk.com/content.asp?id=23>. Acesso em: 11 fev. 2020.
REINO UNIDO. The Investigatory Powers Tribunal. Confidenciality, 5/7/2016b. Disponível em: <https://www.ipt-uk.com/content.asp?id=23>. Acesso em: 11 fev. 2020.
REINO UNIDO. The Investigatory Powers Tribunal. FAQs - Frequently asked Questions, 5/7/2016c. Disponível em: < https://www.ipt-uk.com/content.asp?id=24>. Acesso em: 11 fev. 2020.
ROACH, Kent. Judicial Review of the State’s Anti-Terrorism Activities: The Post 9/11 Experience and Normative Justifications for Judicial Review. Indian Journal of Constitutional Law, v. 3 p. 138-167, 2009.
ROMÊNIA. Romênia. Lei 51/1991 relativa à segurança nacional (“Legea nr. 51/1991 privind securitatea nationala a Romaniei”). Disponível em: <http://legislatie.resurse-pentru-democratie.org/legea/51-1991.php>. Acesso em: 22 mar. 2020.
SAMPAIO, José Adércio L. A Constituição Reinventada. Belo Horizonte: Del Rey, 2002.
SAMPAIO, José Adércio L. Direito à Intimidade e à Vida Privada. Belo Horizonte: Del Rey, 1997
SCHEININ, Martin. Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms While Countering Terrorism: Compilation of Good Practices on Legal and Institutional Frameworks and Measures That Ensure Respect for Human Rights by Intelligence Agencies While Countering Terrorism, Including on Their Oversight. United Nations General Assembly, 17/5/2010. Disponível em: <http://www.un.org/Docs/journal/asp/ws.asp?m=A/HRC/14/46>. Acesso em 11 mar. 2020.
SCOTT, Paul. F. Once More unto the Breach: R (Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal. Edinburgh Law Review, v. 24, n. 1, p. 103-109, 2020.
SHIFFMAN, John; COOKE, Kristina. U.S. Directs Agents to Cover up Program Used to Investigate Americans. Reuters, 5/8/2013. Disponível em: <http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/05/us-dea-sod-idUSBRE97409R20130805>. Acesso em: 11 mar. 2020.
SUÉCIA. Lei sobre Tribunal de Inteligência e Defesa (Lag (2009:966) om Försvarsunderrättelsedomstol). Disponível em: < https://www.riksdagen.se/sv/dokument-lagar/dokument/svensk-forfattningssamling/lag-2009966-om-forsvarsunderrattelsedomstol_sfs-2009-966>. Acesso em: 11 mar. 2020.
SZÁDECZKY, Tamás. Information Security Law and Strategy in Hungary. Academic and Applied Research in Public Management Science, v. 14, n. 4, p. 281-289, 2015.
TARROW, Sidney. War, states, and contention: A comparative historical study. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2015.
TRÉGUER, Félix. From Deep State Illegality to Law of the Land: The Case of Internet Surveillance in France. Conference Paper, 2016. Disponível em: <encurtador.com.br/GHLX2>. Acesso em 11 abr. 2020.
UNIÃO EUROPA. European Commission. Europe and the global information society. Recommendations to the European Council by the High-Level Group on the Information Society to the Corfu European Council. Bulletin of the European Union, Supplement No. 2/94. [followup to the White Paper] (commonly called the Bangemann Report), 1994. Disponível em: <http://aei.pitt.edu/1199/> Acesso em 11 mar. 2020.
UNIÃO EUROPEIA. European Commission for Democracy through Law. Report on the Democratic Oversight of the Security Services (Venice Commission), 1-2/6/2007”. Disponível em: <https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD(2015)010-e>. Acesso em: 11 mar. 2020.
UNIÃO EUROPEIA. Parlamento. Report on the US NSA surveillance programme, surveillance bodies in various Member States and their impact on EU citizens’ fundamental rights and on transatlantic cooperation in Justice and Home Affairs (2013/2188(INI)). 0A7-0139/2014 Disponível em: <https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?reference=A7-2014-0139&type=REPORT&language=EN&redirect>. Acesso em: 11 abr. 2020.
UNIÃO EUROPEIA. Surveille Policy Brief: Assessing surveillance technologies: A nuanced approach for determining security benefits against financial costs, moral hazards and impact on fundamental rights, 2015. disponível em <https://efus.eu/files/2015/09/SURVEILLE-Policy-Brief.pdf>. Acesso em: 11 mar. 2020.
VAN DIJCK, José; POELL, Thomas; DE WAAL, Martijn. The platform society: Public values in a connective world. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018.
WETZLING, Thorsten Germany’s intelligence reform: More surveillance, modest restraints and inefficient controls. Stiftung Neue Verantwortung, 2017. Disponível em: < https://www.stiftung-nv.de/sites/default/files/snv_thorsten_wetzling_germanys_foreign_intelligence_reform.pdf>. Acesso em: 11 fev. 2020.
WETZLING, Thorsten. The key to intelligence reform in Germany: Strengthening the G10-Commission's role to authorise strategic surveillance. Stiftung Neue Verantwortung, p. 9-12, 2016.
WOODS, Lorna. The Investigatory Powers Act 2016. European Data Protection Law Review, v. 3, n. 1, p. 103-105, 2017.
ALEMANHA. BVerfGE 143, 1, de 20/9/2016b. Disponível em: < https://www.servat.unibe.ch/dfr/bv143001.html>. Acesso em: 11 fev. 2020.
ALEMANHA. Gesetz zur Ausland-Ausland-Fernmeldeaufklärung, 2016a. Disponível em: <https://www.bgbl.de/xaver/bgbl/start.xav#__bgbl__%2F%2F*%5B%40attr_id%3D%27bgbl116s3346.pdf%27%5D__1590194943323 >. Acesso em: 11 jan. 2020.
ALEMANHA. Gesetz zur Beschränkung des Brief-, Post- und Fernmeldegeheimn isses (G10/Artikel 10-Gesetz), 1968 (2017). Disponível em: < https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/g10_2001/>. Acesso em: 21 mar. 2020.
ALEMANHA. Tribunal Constitucional Federal. 1 BvR 2835/17, de 19/5/2020. Disponível em: <https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Entscheidungen/DE/2020/05/rs20200519_1bvr283517.html>. Acesso em 20 mai. 2020.
ARANTES, Rogério Bastos; KERCHE, Fábio. Judiciário e democracia no Brasil. Novos Estudos CEBRAP, n. 54, p. 27-411999.
ARGENTINA. Ley de inteligencia nacional (Ley 25.520), de 3/12/ 2001. Disponível em: < http://servicios.infoleg.gob.ar/infolegInternet/anexos/70000-74999/70496/norma.htm>. Acesso em 15 abr. 2020.
ÁUSTRIA. Disposição legal completa para a lei policial de segurança (versão consolidada maio de 2020) (Gesamte Rechtsvorschrift für Sicherheitspolizeigesetz, Fassung vom 16.05.2020). Disponível em: <https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/GeltendeFassung.wxe?Abfrage=Bundesnormen&Gesetzesnummer=10005792>. Acesso em: 15 mai. 2020.
BALZACQ, Thierry. The three faces of securitization: Political agency, audience and context. European journal of international relations, v. 11, n. 2, p. 171-201, 2005.
BENTHAM, Jeremy. The Panopticon Writings. London; New York : Verso, 2010 [1787].
BESSEGHINI, Maschietto M. Szabò and Vissy v. Hungary: a step back? Studio Legale, 5/12/2016. Disponível em: < https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=435b47eb-31a0-4240-b17a-27894e7fffd7>. Acesso em: 20 mai. 2020.
BUZAN, Barry; WÆVER, Ole; DE WILDE, Jaap. Security: a new framework for analysis. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1998.
CAMERON, Iain. National Security and the European Convention on Human Rights. The Hague: Kluwer Law; Martinus Nijhoff, 2000.
CASTELLS, Manuel. A Sociedade em Rede. Trad. Roneide Venacio Majer. 6ª edi. atual. São Paulo: Paz e Terra, 1999.
CHILE. Ley 19.974, de 2004. Disponível em: < https://www.leychile.cl/Navegar?idNorma=230999> Acesso em: 20 mar. 2020.
DE HERT, Paul; BOEHM, Franziska. The Rights of Notification after Surveillance Is over: Ready for Recognition. In BUS, Jacques et al (ed). Digital Enlightenment Yearbook 2012. IOS Press, 2012. Disponível em: <http://www.vub.ac.be/LSTS/pub/Dehert/408.pdf>.Acesso em: 11 mar. 2020.
DIXIT, Priya, Securitization and Terroristization: Analyzing States’ Usage of the Rhetoric of Terrorism In KOCH Bettina (ed). State Terror, State Violence. Global Perspectives. Springer VS, p 31-50, 2015.
DIXIT, Priya. Securitization and terroristization: analyzing states’ usage of the rhetoric of terrorism. In KOCH, Bettina (ed). State Terror, State Violence: Global Perspectives. Wiesbaden: Springer VS, p. 31-50, 2016.
DUNHAM, Ian M. Big Data: A Revolution That Will Transform How We Live, Work, and Think. The AAG Review of Books, v. 3, n. 1, p. 19-21, 2015.
ESLOVÊNIA. Lei da Agência Eslovena de Inteligência e Segurança (ZSOVA), 1999. Disponível em: <http://www.pisrs.si/Pis.web/pregledPredpisa?id=ZAKO1884>. Acesso em: 22 mar. 2020.
ESTADOS UNIDOS. 50 U.S. Code, update 2020. Disponível em: <https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1803>. Acesso em 20 abr. 2020.
ESTADOS UNIDOS. Privacy & Civil Liberties Oversight Board. Report on the Telephone Records Program Conducted under Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act and on the Operations of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. Washington, DC, 23/1/2014. Disponível em: < https://www.pclob.gov/library/215-Report_on_the_Telephone_Records_Program.pdf>. Acesso em 11 mar. 2020.
EUROPA. Corte Europeia de Direitos Humanos. 4a. Seção. Szabo and Vissy v. Hungary, j. 12/1/2016. Disponível em: < https://policehumanrightsresources.org/szabo-and-vissy-v-hungary-37138-14>. Acesso em: 11 abr. 2020.
FEATHERSTONE, Mike. Archiving cultures. British Journal of Sociology, v. 51, n. 1, p. 161-184, 2000.
FELDMAN, Shelley. Surveillance and Securitization. FELDMAN, Shelley; GEISLER, Charles C.; MENON, Gayatri A. (ed). Accumulating insecurity: violence and dispossession in the making of everyday life, Athens: University of Georgia Press, p. 185-212, 2011.
FRA - EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS. Surveillance by intelligence services: fundamental rights safeguards and remedies in the European Union, 2016. Disponível em: < https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2015/surveillance-intelligence-services-volume-i-member-states-legal-frameworks>. Acesso em: 11 mar. 2020.
FOUCAULT, Michel. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Vintage 1991.
GARNHAM, Nicholas. Europe and the Global Information Society: The History of a Troubled Relationship. Telematics and Informatics, v. 14, n. 4, p. 323-327, 1997.
GINSBURG, Tom. Beyond Judicial Review: Ancillary Powers of Constitutional Courts. In GINSBURG, Tom; KAGAN, Robert (eds). Institutions and public Law: Comparative approaches. New York: Peter Lang Publishing Inc, p. 225-244, 2005.
GRÉCIA. Lei 3649/2008. Disponível em: <http://www.nis.gr/npimages/docs/LAW_NUMBER%203649_en.pdf >. Acesso em 11 mar. 2020.
GYOLLAI, Daniel; KORKUT, Umut. Border Management and Migration Controls–Hungary report. 2019. Disponibilidade em: <https://uu.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1334555/FULLTEXT01.pdf>. Acesso em: 11 abr. 2020.
HUNGRIA. 1995. CXXV. Lei sobre serviços de segurança nacional (1995. évi CXXV. Törvény a nemzetbiztonsági szolgálatokról). Disponível em: <https://net.jogtar.hu/jogszabaly?docid=99500125.TV>. Acesso em: 11 abr. 2020.
IRLANDA. Interception of Postal Packets and Telecommunications Messages (Regulation) Act, 1993. Disponível em: <http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1993/act/10/enacted/en/print>. Acesso em: 11 mar. 2020.
LETÔNIA. Lei de Operações Investigatórias (Investigatory Operations Law), 1993. Disponível em: <https://likumi.lv/doc.php?id=57573>. Acesso em: 22 mar. 2020.
LOEBBECKE, Claudia; PICOT, Arnold. Reflections on societal and business model transformation arising from digitization and big data analytics: A research agenda. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, v. 24, n. 3, p. 149-157, 2015.
LYON, David. As apostas de Snowden: desafios para entendimento de vigilância hoje. Ciência e cultura, v. 68, n. 1, p. 25-34, 2016.
LYON, David. The electronic eye: The rise of surveillance society. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1994.
MANGET, Fred F. Intelligence and the Rise of Judicial Intervention. In JOHNSON, Loch K. (ed). Handbook of Intelligence Studies, London: Routledge, 2006, 329-342, 2006.
MARTIN, Allan. Digital literacy and the “digital society”. LANKSHEAR, Colin; KNOBEL, Michele (eds). Digital literacies: Concepts, policies and practices. New York Peter Lang, p. 151-176, 2008.
MAYER-SCHONBERGER, Viktor. Delete: the virtue of forgetting in the digital age. Princeton, Princeton University Press: 2009.
McINTYRE, T.J. Judicial Oversight of Surveillance: The Case of Ireland in Comparative Perspective. In SCHEININ, Martin; KRUNKE, Helle; AKSENOVA, Marina (eds.). Judges as Guardians of Constitutionalism and Human Rights. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, p. 136-172, 2016.
PAÍSES BAIXOS. Comissão de Poderes de Investigação (Toetsingscommissie Inzet Bevoegdheden – TIB), 2020a. Disponível em: < https://www.tib-ivd.nl/>. Acesso em 22 mar. 2020.
PAÍSES BAIXOS. Comissão de Revisão dos Serviços de Inteligência e Segurança (Commissie van Toezicht op de Inlichtingen- en Veiligheidsdiensten - CTIVD). Oversight 2020b. Disponível em: < https://english.ctivd.nl/oversight>. Acesso em 22 mar. 2020.
PODKOWIK, Jan. Privacy in the digital era – Polish electronic surveillance law declared partially unconstitutional: Judgment of the Constitutional Tribunal of Poland of 30 July 2014, K 23/11. European Constitutional Law Review, v.11, n. 3, p. 577-595, 2015.
POLÔNIA. Tribunal Constitucional. K 23/11, 30/7/2014. Disponível em: <http://prawo.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/download.xsp/WDU20140001055/O/D20141055.pdf>. Acesso em: 22 mar 2020.
PRIVACY INTERNATIONAL. Privacy International v. Secretary of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office et al. (UK Mass Surveillance / UK-US Intelligence Sharing), status: 2016. Disponível em: < https://privacyinternational.org/legal-case-files/1619/privacy-international-v-secretary-state-foreign-and-commonwealth-office-et-al>. Acesso em 20 fev. 2020.
REINO UNIDO. High Court of Justice. Queen’s Bench Division. Divisional Court. Liberty v. Secretary of State for the Home Department et al, j. 29/7/2019a. Disponível em: < https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Liberty-judgment-Final.pdf>. Acesso em 20 mar. 2020.
REINO UNIDO. Investigatory Powers Act 2016d. Disponível em: < http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2016/25/contents/enacted>. Acesso em: 22 mar. 2020.
REINO UNIDO. Investigatory Powers Tribunal. Liberty & Others v. the Security Service, SIS, GCHQ, IPT/13/77/H, j. 22/6/2015b. Disponível em: <https://www.ipt-uk.com/judgments.asp?id=27>. Acesso em 20 mar. 2020.
REINO UNIDO. Investigatory Powers Tribunal. News Group Newspapers Limited and Others v The Metropolitan Police Commissioner. IPT/14/176/8, j. 17/12/2015a. Disponível em: < https://www.ipt-uk.com/judgments.asp?id=30>. Acesso em 20 abr. 2020.
REINO UNIDO. Investigatory Powers Tribunal. News Privacy International v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No. 2) (Note) [2017] UKIPTrib 15_110-CH, j. 18/12/2017. Disponível em: <https://www.ipt-uk.com/docs/Privacy%20International%20v%20SSFCA%20and%20Ors%201%20December%202017.pdf>. Acesso em: 20 mar. 2020.
REINO UNIDO. Investigatory Powers Tribunal. News Privacy International v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2018] 2 All ER 166. Disponível em: < https://www.matrixlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Privacy-International-v-Secretary-of-State-for-Foreign-and-Commonwealth-Affairs-2018-UKIP-Trib-IPT-15-110-CH.pdf>. Acesso em: 20 mar. 2020.
REINO UNIDO. Investigatory Powers Tribunal. Privacy International v. Secretary of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office et al [2016] UKIPTrib 15_110-CH, j. 17/10/2016e. Disponível em: < https://www.ipt-uk.com/docs/Bulk_Data_Judgment.pdf>. Acesso em 20 mar. 2020.
REINO UNIDO. Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. Disponível em: < https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/23/section/67A>. Acesso em: 22 mar. 2020.
REINO UNIDO. Supreme Court. R (Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal and others. [2019] UKSC 22, j.15/5/2019b. Disponível em: < https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2018-0004.html>. Acesso em 11 mar. 2020.
REINO UNIDO. The Investigatory Powers Tribunal. Complaining, 5/7/2016a. Disponível em: <https://www.ipt-uk.com/content.asp?id=23>. Acesso em: 11 fev. 2020.
REINO UNIDO. The Investigatory Powers Tribunal. Confidenciality, 5/7/2016b. Disponível em: <https://www.ipt-uk.com/content.asp?id=23>. Acesso em: 11 fev. 2020.
REINO UNIDO. The Investigatory Powers Tribunal. FAQs - Frequently asked Questions, 5/7/2016c. Disponível em: < https://www.ipt-uk.com/content.asp?id=24>. Acesso em: 11 fev. 2020.
ROACH, Kent. Judicial Review of the State’s Anti-Terrorism Activities: The Post 9/11 Experience and Normative Justifications for Judicial Review. Indian Journal of Constitutional Law, v. 3 p. 138-167, 2009.
ROMÊNIA. Romênia. Lei 51/1991 relativa à segurança nacional (“Legea nr. 51/1991 privind securitatea nationala a Romaniei”). Disponível em: <http://legislatie.resurse-pentru-democratie.org/legea/51-1991.php>. Acesso em: 22 mar. 2020.
SAMPAIO, José Adércio L. A Constituição Reinventada. Belo Horizonte: Del Rey, 2002.
SAMPAIO, José Adércio L. Direito à Intimidade e à Vida Privada. Belo Horizonte: Del Rey, 1997
SCHEININ, Martin. Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms While Countering Terrorism: Compilation of Good Practices on Legal and Institutional Frameworks and Measures That Ensure Respect for Human Rights by Intelligence Agencies While Countering Terrorism, Including on Their Oversight. United Nations General Assembly, 17/5/2010. Disponível em: <http://www.un.org/Docs/journal/asp/ws.asp?m=A/HRC/14/46>. Acesso em 11 mar. 2020.
SCOTT, Paul. F. Once More unto the Breach: R (Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal. Edinburgh Law Review, v. 24, n. 1, p. 103-109, 2020.
SHIFFMAN, John; COOKE, Kristina. U.S. Directs Agents to Cover up Program Used to Investigate Americans. Reuters, 5/8/2013. Disponível em: <http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/05/us-dea-sod-idUSBRE97409R20130805>. Acesso em: 11 mar. 2020.
SUÉCIA. Lei sobre Tribunal de Inteligência e Defesa (Lag (2009:966) om Försvarsunderrättelsedomstol). Disponível em: < https://www.riksdagen.se/sv/dokument-lagar/dokument/svensk-forfattningssamling/lag-2009966-om-forsvarsunderrattelsedomstol_sfs-2009-966>. Acesso em: 11 mar. 2020.
SZÁDECZKY, Tamás. Information Security Law and Strategy in Hungary. Academic and Applied Research in Public Management Science, v. 14, n. 4, p. 281-289, 2015.
TARROW, Sidney. War, states, and contention: A comparative historical study. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2015.
TRÉGUER, Félix. From Deep State Illegality to Law of the Land: The Case of Internet Surveillance in France. Conference Paper, 2016. Disponível em: <encurtador.com.br/GHLX2>. Acesso em 11 abr. 2020.
UNIÃO EUROPA. European Commission. Europe and the global information society. Recommendations to the European Council by the High-Level Group on the Information Society to the Corfu European Council. Bulletin of the European Union, Supplement No. 2/94. [followup to the White Paper] (commonly called the Bangemann Report), 1994. Disponível em: <http://aei.pitt.edu/1199/> Acesso em 11 mar. 2020.
UNIÃO EUROPEIA. European Commission for Democracy through Law. Report on the Democratic Oversight of the Security Services (Venice Commission), 1-2/6/2007”. Disponível em: <https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD(2015)010-e>. Acesso em: 11 mar. 2020.
UNIÃO EUROPEIA. Parlamento. Report on the US NSA surveillance programme, surveillance bodies in various Member States and their impact on EU citizens’ fundamental rights and on transatlantic cooperation in Justice and Home Affairs (2013/2188(INI)). 0A7-0139/2014 Disponível em: <https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?reference=A7-2014-0139&type=REPORT&language=EN&redirect>. Acesso em: 11 abr. 2020.
UNIÃO EUROPEIA. Surveille Policy Brief: Assessing surveillance technologies: A nuanced approach for determining security benefits against financial costs, moral hazards and impact on fundamental rights, 2015. disponível em <https://efus.eu/files/2015/09/SURVEILLE-Policy-Brief.pdf>. Acesso em: 11 mar. 2020.
VAN DIJCK, José; POELL, Thomas; DE WAAL, Martijn. The platform society: Public values in a connective world. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018.
WETZLING, Thorsten Germany’s intelligence reform: More surveillance, modest restraints and inefficient controls. Stiftung Neue Verantwortung, 2017. Disponível em: < https://www.stiftung-nv.de/sites/default/files/snv_thorsten_wetzling_germanys_foreign_intelligence_reform.pdf>. Acesso em: 11 fev. 2020.
WETZLING, Thorsten. The key to intelligence reform in Germany: Strengthening the G10-Commission's role to authorise strategic surveillance. Stiftung Neue Verantwortung, p. 9-12, 2016.
WOODS, Lorna. The Investigatory Powers Act 2016. European Data Protection Law Review, v. 3, n. 1, p. 103-105, 2017.
Downloads
Publicado
2022-10-20
Como Citar
Leite Sampaio, J. A. (2022). DATIFICAÇÃO E VIGILÂNCIA:: o judiciário é guardião dos direitos fundamentais na sociedade digital?. Revista Brasileira De Direitos Fundamentais & Justiça, 16(46), 155–175. https://doi.org/10.30899/dfj.v16i46.1059
Edição
Seção
DOUTRINA NACIONAL
Licença
Copyright (c) 2022 Revista Brasileira de Direitos Fundamentais & Justiça
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Para acesso ao conteúdo do periódico, favor entrar em contato com:
Editora Fórum
0800 704 3737
vendas@editoraforum.com.br
