European Integration - Realities and Perspectives. Proceedings 2018
Probative Value of Data Obtained Through Technical Surveillance
Abstract: The present paper aims at analyzing the probative value of data obtained through technical
surveillance, as the efficiency of the fight against corruption and organized crime calls for the use of modern
investigative means and judicial bodies increasingly resort to the use of technical surveillance t o obtain
evidence in criminal proceedings. Statistical data from the courts attests to the large number of requests for
authorization of interception of communications, a context in which we can state that this measure became a
routine measure in criminal cases. Usage of intercepted communications as evidence obtained in other cases
raises serious questions as to ensuring the proportionality of the interference with the right to privacy and
with the pursued scope which must be legitimate, concrete, known, verified and analyzed by the judge at t he
time of authorization and not a future one, hypothetically, which may later arise in other causes. Another
question marks the legal basis, in terms of quality and compatibility with the principle of the preeminence of
law, the storage and archiving of communications for a long time, for use in other future causes. The
academic and practical interest of the present study lies in the fact that it addresses both law theorists and
practitioners in the field as it analyzes how judicial bodies can use data relevant to the criminal process,
obtained through modern surveillance techniques.
Keywords: technical surveillance; interception; wiretap; probative value
1. Valuation of Legally Obtained Data Resulting from the Technical Surveillance as
Intercepted and recorded conversations or communications relating to the deed that is the object of the
prosecution or which contribute to the identification or localization of persons, are transcribed by the
prosecutor or the criminal investigation body in a minute mentioning the issued warrant, telephone
numbers, identifying information of systems or access points, the names of the person who made the
communications and the date and time of each call or communication. The minutes are authenticated
by the prosecutor.
The minutes obtained under the Code of Criminal Procedure constitute written evidence on the facts
and circumstances found during the use of technical surveillance measures. (Gradinaru, 2014)
A copy of the support containing the data from the technical surveillance shall be attached to the
minutes in a sealed envelope with the seal of the criminal prosecution body. Given that the intercept
operation is not susceptible to being fixed on a particular support, what is preserved is the recording.
Referred to the majority opinion, according to which the minutes of the recordings of communications
and conversations are means of proof, an antinomic point of view was also stated. Thus, it is argued
1 Al. I. Cuza University of Iasi, Romania, Address: Blvd. Carol I, no. 22, Iasi, Romania, Tel.: +40232201443, Fax:
+40232217000, Romania, E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org.