EU Scolds Sweden for Not Spying on their Citizens

macedoniaonline.eu...

-"The European Court of Justice has told Sweden that it must implement a 2006 measure requiring telecom operators to store information about their customers’ phone calls and emails.
The European Union directive, known as the Data Retention Directive, was approved by Brussels in March 2006, but Sweden has yet to implement the measure more than three years after its passage.

The Swedish government conceded to the court that it had not fulfilled its obligations and assured the court that the EU directive 2006/24 can be expected to pass into Swedish law on April 1st 2010.-"

I hope Sweden does not sign this into law. I hope Sweden upholds their citizens liberty. The Nordic countries are known for their strong Civil Libertarian front.

[edit on 5-2-2010 by Misoir]

If the Swedes wanted liberty why did they join the EU?

Oh because economic opportunity (money cash $$ bling bling) is MORE important than civil liberties.

Looks like this WILL be passing into law on April 1st.

Unless some sort of miracle happens. It will take Divine Intervention.

[edit on 5-2-2010 by muzzleflash]

I hope Sweden does not sign this into law. I hope Sweden upholds their citizens liberty. The Nordic countries are known for their strong Civil Libertarian front.

What? Which liberties? Our government can see what we do on the net, read our mail/email, tap into our phone calls and do just about everything else short of setting up cameras in our own houses.

So of course they'll pass the law, it's what our gov does; pass #ty laws.

For those that do not know it (and that are interested in knowing it), this is what that directive says about the data to be kept to a maximum of two years:

Categories of data to be retained

1. Member States shall ensure that the following categories of data are retained under this Directive:

 (a) data necessary to trace and identify the source of a communication:

  (1) concerning fixed network telephony and mobile telephony:

   (i) the calling telephone number;

   (ii) the name and address of the subscriber or registered user;

  (2) concerning Internet access, Internet e-mail and Internet telephony:

   (i) the user ID(s) allocated;

   (ii) the user ID and telephone number allocated to any communication entering the public telephone network;

   (iii) the name and address of the subscriber or registered user to whom an Internet Protocol (IP) address, user ID or telephone number was allocated at the time of the communication;

 (b) data necessary to identify the destination of a communication:

  (1) concerning fixed network telephony and mobile telephony:

   (i) the number(s) dialled (the telephone number(s) called), and, in cases involving supplementary services such as call forwarding or call transfer, the number or numbers to which the call is routed;

   (ii) the name(s) and address(es) of the subscriber(s) or registered user(s);

  (2) concerning Internet e-mail and Internet telephony:

   (i) the user ID or telephone number of the intended recipient(s) of an Internet telephony call;

   (ii) the name(s) and address(es) of the subscriber(s) or registered user(s) and user ID of the intended recipient of the communication;

 (c) data necessary to identify the date, time and duration of a communication:

  (1) concerning fixed network telephony and mobile telephony, the date and time of the start and end of the communication;

  (2) concerning Internet access, Internet e-mail and Internet telephony:

   (i) the date and time of the log-in and log-off of the Internet access service, based on a certain time zone, together with the IP address, whether dynamic or static, allocated by the Internet access service provider to a communication, and the user ID of the subscriber or registered user;

   (ii) the date and time of the log-in and log-off of the Internet e-mail service or Internet telephony service, based on a certain time zone;

 (d) data necessary to identify the type of communication:

  (1) concerning fixed network telephony and mobile telephony: the telephone service used;

  (2) concerning Internet e-mail and Internet telephony: the Internet service used;

 (e) data necessary to identify users' communication equipment or what purports to be their equipment:

  (1) concerning fixed network telephony, the calling and called telephone numbers;

  (2) concerning mobile telephony:

   (i) the calling and called telephone numbers;

   (ii) the International Mobile Subscriber Identity (IMSI) of the calling party;

   (iii) the International Mobile Equipment Identity (IMEI) of the calling party;

   (iv) the IMSI of the called party;

   (v) the IMEI of the called party;

   (vi) in the case of pre-paid anonymous services, the date and time of the initial activation of the service and the location label (Cell ID) from which the service was activated;

  (3) concerning Internet access, Internet e-mail and Internet telephony:

   (i) the calling telephone number for dial-up access;

   (ii) the digital subscriber line (DSL) or other end point of the originator of the communication;

 (f) data necessary to identify the location of mobile communication equipment:

  (1) the location label (Cell ID) at the start of the communication;

  (2) data identifying the geographic location of cells by reference to their location labels (Cell ID) during the period for which communications data are retained.

2. No data revealing the content of the communication may be retained pursuant to this Directive.

The source for the above is the text of the EU directive, available here in all the EU official languages.

If Sweden agreed to it, then it must make it into law, the tribunal scolding is the logical reaction.

reply to post by muzzleflash


It works both ways. If someone committed an offence against you via communication, be it fraud or assault, I'd like the data of said communication to be retained so prosecution can happen. Without it, nothing would come of it. Not all crime is instantly visible.

To me, this is just another benign use of technology. It's who's using it that is the issue, and that is a separate issue entirely.

I don't see why crazed anti-government types seek to limit the powers of the "evil" governments instead of simply getting rid of the evil governments. It seems incredibly lazy.

reply to post by Edews


Compared to all other countries the Nordic have the most personal freedom. So if your complaining about your lack of liberty imagine everyone else.

reply to post by davesidious


Like th old addage says: "No matter how you vote, the government still gets back in". It doesn't matter which side is in control (and it is usually the choice of two), the same agenda will continue with the puppeteers pulling the strings, with different puppets in play to keep you entertained.

Expect it to be passed. No matter who thinks what.

I'm English and currently living in the South of Sweden. I felt very relieved when I first moved here, and thought it was a good move. Never seen a CCTV camera, don't hear the clicking on the phone you get in England. What I began to realise over the next year, is the reasons they don't need it here, the Swedes govern themselves, they check on their neighbours (there is a government site that gives all information on everybody how much they earned who they work, what they owe etc). Swedes check on their neighbours and if they think they are living beyond their means and maybe into criminal activity they report them.
I know of one Swedish woman, whom was involved with a anti- government group who reported herself.
They believe everything their government tells them (as do the Danes) they never question anything.
They are massively brainwashed IMHO.
Elsewhere in Europe ie Germany and especially France the people stick together they fight for their rights.
The Brits are slowly going down the path of the brainwashed, people being encouraged to spy on each other the pubs are being closed, hundreds a week. The pubs used to be the heart of a town a place locally where a Barrister would have a pint with a bricky, young and olf and discuss the world, politics, football or whatever. Now there is nowhere for people of all walks of life to get together.
Divide and conquer

PS First post have been lurking for a year now

reply to post by hippychick38

That "spy on each other" method was used during the Portuguese dictatorship that ended in 1974, people were always afraid of what they did or said because of that, only speaking freely in front of people that knew well, usually only close family and friends.

It's a very effective system, cheaper than listening to phone conversations.

reply to post by hippychick38


Clicking on the phone? Are you that paranoid? Phone tapping in the UK has been digital, or performed at the exchange, or both, for ages. Clicking on the phone is what happens when someone is physically tapped into your domestic phone line, like they used to do in Miami Vice.

Paranoid much?