I looked deeper into the first case and it doesn’t look like a random border check. He was a political activist who got in touch with a member of terrorist orga

I looked deeper into the first case and it doesn’t look like a random border check. He was a political activist who got in touch with a member of terrorist organization, if I understand it correctly. There was a massive media campaign to present this case in a certain way, but at least two courts confirmed the legality of the demand to unlock the devices. The abuse of power means they could detain him indefinitely etc (as it happens in countries where abuse of power is common). But in this case he had the right to defend himself in the court and he used it. This is very far from the situation where encryption is illegal, all communications are transparent to the state and it can search for incriminating data without asking.