Amendment To The Criminal Procedure Code And The Amendment Of The Act On Electronic Communications

Original Language Title: změna trestního řádu a změna zákona o elektronických komunikacích

Read the untranslated law here: https://portal.gov.cz/app/zakony/download?idBiblio=67072&nr=177~2F2008~20Sb.&ft=txt

177/2008 Sb.



LAW



of 23 December 2003. April 2008,



amending Act No. 141/1961 Coll., on criminal court proceedings

(code of criminal procedure), as amended by later regulations, and Act No. 127/2005 Coll. on

electronic communications and amending certain related laws

(Act on electronic communications), as amended



Parliament has passed the following Act of the United States:



PART THE FIRST



Amendment to the criminal procedure code



Article. (I)



Act No. 141/1961 Coll., on criminal court proceedings (code of criminal procedure), in

amended by Act No. 59/1965 Coll., Act No. 58/1969 Coll., Act No. 149/1969

Coll., Act No. 48/1973 Coll., Act No. 29/1978 Coll., Act No. 43/1980

Coll., Act No. 159/1989 Coll., Act No. 175/1990 Coll., Act No. 303/1990

Coll., Act No. 563/1991 Coll., Act No. 25/1993 Coll., Act No. 115/1993

Coll., Act No. 293/1993 Coll., Act No. 154/1994 Coll., constitutional

the Court declared under no. 214/1994 Coll., Constitutional Court

declared under the No. 8/1995 Coll., Act No. 152/1995 Coll., Act No.

150/1997 Coll., Act No. 209/1997 Coll., Act No. 148/1998 Coll., Act No.

166/1998 Coll., Act No. 191/1999 Coll., Act No. 29/2000 Coll., Act No.

30/2000 Coll., Act No. 227/2000 Coll., the Constitutional Court declared

under Act No. 77/2001 Coll., Act No. 143/2001 Coll., Act No. 265/2001 Coll.

Constitutional Court declared under no. 424/2001 Coll., Act No.

200/2002 Coll., Act No. 227/2002 Coll., Act No. 320/2002 Coll., Act No.

218/2003 Coll., Act No. 279/2003 Coll., Act No. 235/2004 Coll., Act No.

257/2004 Coll., Act No. 283/2004 Coll., Act No. 539/2004 Coll., Act No.

587/2004 Coll., Constitutional Court declared under no. 45/2005 Coll.

Constitutional Court declared under no 239/2005 Coll., Act No.

394/2005 Coll., Act No. 413/2005 Coll., Act No. 79/2006 Coll., Act No.

112/2006 Coll., Act No. 115/2006 Coll., Act No. 165/2006 Coll., Act No.

253/2006 Coll., Act No. 321/2006 Coll., Act No. 170/2007 Coll., Act No.

179/2007 Coll., Act No. 345/2007 Coll., Constitutional Court

declared under the No. 90/2008 Coll., Act No. 121/2008 Coll., Act No.

129/2008 Coll. and Act No. 135/2008 Coll., is amended as follows:



1. In section 8 paragraph 3 reads:



"(3) the reasons referred to in paragraph 2 may, President of the Chamber, and in

on the proposal of the preliminary proceedings, the Prosecutor, the judge may order tracking

bank account or an account with the person entitled to registration of investment

instruments under a special law, for a maximum period of six months.

If the purpose for which it was ordered, and viewing account after that time,

can this tracking be extended by order of a judge of a Court of a higher

degree and in preliminary proceedings, on a proposal from the Prosecutor, the judge

the regional court for another six months, even repeatedly. The data obtained

According to this provision cannot be used for any purpose other than for criminal

the proceedings in which they were acquired. ".



2. In article 30, the following paragraph 4 is added:



"(4) the procedure for the review of the order to wiretap and record

telecommunications is excluded by the judge who participated in the

making a decision in a previous case. The judge who participated in the decision-making

in the procedure for the review of the order to the interception and recording of telecommunications

traffic is excluded from consideration. ".



3. section 88 reads as follows:



"§ 88



(1) If criminal proceedings for particularly serious intentional crime

or for another an intentional criminal act, to which the prosecution agrees to a renowned

the international treaty, you may be issued an order to wiretap and record

telecommunications, if it can be reasonably assumed that it will be

obtained significant facts for criminal proceedings and could not be when the reference

purpose achieved or if it would otherwise reach substantially

not very convenient. Interception and recording of telecommunications made for

the needs of all bodies active in criminal proceedings, the police of the Czech Republic.

The implementation of interception and recording of telecommunications between an advocate

and the accused is not permitted. If it finds a police wiretap authority and

record of telecommunications, that communicates with her, the accused

barrister is obliged to immediately destroy interception and recording information

that is, in this context, not to know. The Protocol on the

the destruction of a record for inclusion in the file.



(2) order the interception and recording of telecommunications is authorised to

the President of the Senate, and in preparatory proceedings upon a proposal of the public prosecutor

judge. Command to the interception and recording of telecommunications must

be issued in writing and shall be justified, including the specific reference to

renowned international contract in case that leads to criminal proceedings for

an intentional criminal act, whose prosecution of this international agreement commits.

In order for the interception and recording of telecommunications must be

fixed user address or device and the person of the user if the

her identity known, and time when the interception and recording of

telecommunications is carried out, which may not be longer than four

of the month; in the justification must be given for specific facts,

that release of this statement, including its duration, justify.

Command to the interception and recording of telecommunications shall immediately

deliver to the police authority. In preliminary proceedings, a copy of the statement to

interception and recording of telecommunications shall send without delay to the judge

the public prosecutor.



(3) the police authority is obliged to continuously evaluate whether to continue

There are grounds, which led to the issuing of the order to wiretap and record

of telecommunications. If reasons have ceased to apply, it shall call interception

and recording of telecommunications to terminate immediately, even before the end of

the period referred to in paragraph 2. This fact without delay, in writing, notify the

the presiding judge, that an order to wiretap and record

telecommunications and also in preliminary proceedings the State

prosecutors and judges.



(4) based on the evaluation of the present course of the wiretap and record

telecommunications can judge of a higher court, and in

on the proposal of the preliminary proceedings, the Prosecutor, the judge of the regional court

the duration of the interception and recording of telecommunications to extend,

and even repeatedly, always for a maximum period of four months.



(5) No order for the interception and recording of telecommunications may

body active in criminal proceedings to order the interception and recording of

telecommunications, or to perform it himself, if the criminal

proceedings for the crime of violence against a group of inhabitants and against

solo travellers (§ 196 and 197a), abduction under section 216 para. 1, trafficking in

children under section 216a para. 1, extortion under section 235 paragraph. 1 or throttling

personal freedom under section 231 para. 1 and 2 of the criminal code, if the

the user agrees to station phone tapped or something.



(6) if it is to be a record of telecommunications used as evidence, it is

need to connect to the Protocol, including the data concerning the place, time, manner

and the content of the record, as well as carried out by the authority which issued the alert.

Other records of the police authority is obliged to indicate keep reliably

so, in order to ensure protection against unauthorized misuse of records, and

in the file-based log noted, where they are stored. In another

the criminal case, than the one in which the interception and recording of telecommunications

operation is executed, the record can be used as evidence if it is even in this

things conducted the prosecution of an offence referred to in paragraph 1, or

with the consent of the user station phone tapped or something.



(7) if the interception and recording of telecommunications have not been

matter relevant to criminal proceedings, the police authority, after

the consent of the Court and, in preliminary proceedings, the Prosecutor shall record

immediately destroy three years after a final end of things.

If the police authority is informed of the submission of extraordinary appeal

resource in due time, will destroy the records of the interception after the decision to

an extraordinary appeal, possibly after the new final

the end of things. Protocol on the destruction of the wiretap sends police record

authority of the public prosecutor, whose decision was final

completed, and in the proceedings before the Court of first instance, the presiding judge, to

insertion on the file.



(8) the Prosecutor, whose decision was finally completed, and

in the proceedings before the Court of first instance, the President of the Senate of the Court after a final

the end of things, informs about the wiretap and record nařízeném

telecommunications the person referred to in paragraph 2, if it is known.

The information contains the designation of the Court which issued the warrant for wiretap and

record of telecommunications, the duration of the interception and the date of its

their. Part of the information is the lesson about the right to submit, within six

months from the date of delivery of this information to the Supreme Court a proposal for

the review of the lawfulness of the interception and recording of telecommunications

operation. President of the Senate shall report to the information the Court of first instance, without delay,

After a final end of things; the Prosecutor, whose decision was

the matter has been finally completed, it shall, without delay after the expiry information

for a review of the decision by the Attorney General pursuant to section

174A.




(9) the information referred to in paragraph 8 of the President of the Chamber or the Prosecutor

in the absence of the control of particularly severe intentional criminal act of protest

organised by the group, in proceedings concerning an offence of protest in favour of

criminal organisation, in proceedings relating to participation in a criminal offence

organisation, or if the offence involved more people and

in relation to at least one of them was the criminal proceedings so far

been completed, or if it is against the person to whom it is to be

communicated, criminal proceedings, or if the provision of such

information could be thwarted by the purpose of criminal proceedings, including proceedings

referred to in paragraph 6, or might endanger the safety of the

State, life, health, rights and freedoms of the people. ".



4. under the third head of the twenty-seventh section is added that including

Title:



"Seventh Partition



Procedure for the review of the order to the interception and recording of telecommunications

operation



§ 314l



At the request of the person referred to in § 88 para. 8 the Supreme Court in a private

session, review the legality of the order to wiretap and record

of telecommunications.



§ 314m



(1) if the Supreme Court finds that an order for eavesdropping and recording

telecommunications has been issued or its implementation was in breach of

the law, said the resolution a violation of law.



(2) this decision is not subject to appeal.



§ 314n



(1) if the Supreme Court finds that an order for eavesdropping and recording

telecommunications has been released and its implementation in accordance with the

the terms of the § 88 para. 1 the said resolution, that the law was not violated.



(2) this decision is not subject to appeal. ".



PART TWO



Amendment of the Act on electronic communications



Article. (II)



In § 97 para. 2 Act No. 127/2005 Coll., on electronic communications and

amending some related laws (Act on electronic

communications), as amended by Act No. 290/2005 Coll., the word "participant"

replaced by the word "user".



PART THREE



The EFFECTIVENESS of the



Article. (III)



This Act shall take effect on 1 January 2000. July 1, 2008.



Vaidya in the r.



Klaus r.



Topolanek in r.