Home » Privacy » data » Data Retention Law In Slovakia

Data Retention Law In Slovakia

Disclosure: All information on this site is harmless and purely for educational purposes which is why we post only authentic, unbiased information! The affiliate links are really there for discounts for our readers and for us to earn small commissions that help us stay afloat! Thanks!

In September 2010, the European Information Society Institute (EISi) shapes in the Slovak Republic (otherwise called Slovakia). The battle against observation in other part states had just been continuing for quite a long while.

The German Constitutional Court in March of that time rejected Germany’s execution of the mandate, and numerous other national activities started showing up. Energized by the endeavors and products of the work of our partners, EISi chose to make suit against information maintenance in Slovakia its first objective.

There was, at the time, no respectful society association to carry out the responsibility in the nation. There was mainly no open discussion and practically nothing, assuming any, clear obstruction against information maintenance. 

Approach and political foundation

After the Data Retention Directive actualized at the national level all through the EU, the subsequent enactment was dependent upon various difficulties at the national level. 1 However, it took a right around ten years to challenge the wellspring of the majority of this: the mandate itself. Today, there is an incredible need to clear clean various post-mandate results. In Slovakia, this involves the audit of the Act on Electronic Communications and some different demonstrations. 

This report plots the battle of propelling a test against the execution of the mandate in Slovakia. It exhibits an image of non-responsive nearby specialists, an absence of open mindfulness and little protection from an attack of security rights among Slovak traditional society and at last residents. It likewise represents an abuse of held information and the excellent routine with regards to divulgence, which is frequently far off from the stated purpose of the law. 

As per the choice of the CJEU, any cover information maintenance that doesn’t recognize people who can be associated with a significant crime. Different people don’t adjust with the rights to security and insurance of individual information. 

Regarding future enactment: 

  • Any metadata maintenance must 
  1. be gone for explicit people or hover of people, and
  2.  have a particular timespan and additionally
  3.  geological territory. 
  • Access to information must be limited to researching demonstrations of a genuine sort that can legitimize the critical impedance with central human rights — for example, the regard of private and family life and security of individual information. 
  • Access to information must be dependent upon legal supervision or the supervision of an autonomous authoritative body which can permit such access dependent on a substantiated application to the courts. 
  • Data maintenance must mirror the different status of people bound by an obligation of secrecy given by national law, for example, lawyers or specialists. 
  • When justification for information detainment is not necessary any longer, the specific individual must tell of the way that he/she was under surveillance before. 
  • The period and kinds of held information in a particular case must adjust to what is vital for accomplishing a specific point. 
  • The information maintenance must give clear defends against conceivable abuse or unapproved access to this information. 
  • Legal guidelines should portray how the information can send away and how the information will pulverize after it is utilized. 
  • Any access and resulting utilization of metadata must fall inside a characterized degree and be for an unmistakably characterized point. 

In April 2014, the Slovak Constitutional Court for starters suspended the national actualizing Act. This measure implies that the maintenance laws are still officially set up; however, they have no lawful impact until the Court chooses the benefits of the grumbling. In any case, simultaneously, information that has just gathered won’t be demolished. It stays open to elucidation whether specialist co-ops could hand over information collected in the past to state specialists upon solicitation. 

If you want to understand more in detail, kindly visit:



Unlock the power of online security with our in-depth reviews and expert insights. Discover the best VPNs, password managers, and privacy tools to safeguard your digital world.