Prosecutor's accused of human rights violations in crypto phone analysis

The Public Prosecution Service’s (OM) new investigative methods, including the seizing, tapping, and hacking of encrypted communication services, violates fundamental human rights, over 100 criminal defense attorneys said in a joint letter.

The OM is not open about its new methods, and this lack of transparency makes it impossible for lawyers to properly check whether evidence has been obtained lawfully and is reliable. And that while decrypted messages play a pivotal role in countless criminal cases, from small matters to the trial against Ridoaun Taghi, the lawyers said.

The right to a fair trial and the right to privacy are at stake, they said. According to them, judges systematically reject requests for insight into the OM’s methods. And such insight is pressing, the lawyers said. “Because in the meantime, strong factual indications have surfaced that fundamental human rights have been violated or are at risk of being violated.”

The lawyers said they endorse “the social benefit of new, advanced investigative methods.” And they usually only speak out on individual cases. But “a limit has been reached,” they said. “The social importance of a good administration of justice is simply too great.”

The lawyers asked parliamentarians to ask questions about the Dutch authorities’ role in international investigations into encrypted communication services. They asked the Ministry of Justice and Security for transparency about the investigative authorities’ methods. And they asked courts for a critical investigation into individual court cases with encrypted messages as evidence.

A spokesperson for the OM told the newspaper Trouw that the OM is aware of the lawyers’ allegations. “To date, the use of crypto data in criminal proceedings has been found lawful by successive judges,” was all he would say on the matter.