8 ms·

How comfortable are you guys with the fact that EU countries allow prosecutors and sometimes even police officers to issue their own search warrants without mea

• andix 7mo ago
  No system is perfect. It's more a theoretical risk for now, if you're not running a shady business.
  • noosphr 7mo ago
    The police will of course decide if you are running a shady business.
    • rithdmc 7mo ago
      Nintendo may also decide this. https://www.pcgamer.com/hardware/uk-games-collector-raided-by-police-after-purchasing-gbp10-000-worth-of-hardware-including-old-dev-kits-disposed-of-by-sega/ https://www.pcgamer.com/hardware/uk-games-collector-raided-b...
• alpineman 7mo ago
  At least there is still the rule of law and democracy in the EU
  • _osud 7mo ago
    Is there really? Governments routinely go against the ECHR and the ECJ, and do nothing to rectify past violations when ruled against. On a national level, sure.
    • input_sh 7mo ago
      Considering who we're comparing it to when discussing this topic: absolutely. Not even a question. Anyone claiming otherwise is delusional at best.
      • Levitz 7mo ago
        A whole lot of websites are inaccessible from my country when there's football on, due to a judicial order meant to curb piracy. The whole deal with Chat Control is also not to be forgotten. I do think you guys see this place with rose tinted glasses sometimes.
        • input_sh 7mo ago
          Does that football scenario mean that the rule of law doesn't exist or that it does exist and is being enforced? I agree with you that both of those laws are stupid, but that's a completely separate discussion to what I'm claiming above.
          • _osud 7mo ago
            Depends on how you interpret the ECHR. Does it allow blocking half the internet during football games? It almost certainly does not: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-115705%22]} https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-115705%... AFAIU this is common because lower courts often deliberately choose to not try to interpret ECHR, leaving that for appeals courts.
            • input_sh 7mo ago
              I interpret ECHR as what it is: not a regulatory body by any stretch of the imagination. It can recommend changes to the national law, but it cannot force any state to do so. You seem to be interpreting it as some sort of an equivalent to the US supreme court, which it is not. But now we're straying even further from my original argument which boils down to "laws mean something" into arguing the intricacies of how laws are supposed to be changed. I'm not interested in having that discussion, as it has nothing to do with my original claim.
  • rafram 7mo ago
    The baseline level of freedom of speech in the EU, in particular, is much, much worse than in the US. We’re talking about a group of countries with active, enforced blasphemy laws! Completely unthinkable for Americans.
    • raincole 7mo ago
      [flagged]
      • deleted 7mo ago
        [deleted]
      • this_user 7mo ago
        The EU is really more middle-of-the-road in most things, while the US tends to be more extreme: more really good ideas, but also more really bad ideas. But that is also the result of the EU being largely controlled by bureaucrats and compliance officers instead of real leaders.
      • haspok 7mo ago
        Is it not true that when entering the US you are required to show all your social media content on request, and if there is anything negative about the current administration, you can be denied entry (if you are lucky, and not detained for an indefinite amount of time)? Truly exceptional indeed. You are basically on par with China.
        • prmoustache 7mo ago
          Do they really do that and what do they do when you say you don't have one? Do they believe you or not having one is as suspicious as having one with the content they don't like?
          • u8080 7mo ago
            This is just fake info, I was in China previous year and noone entering or exiting was required to show anything except passport.
  • nozzlegear 7mo ago
    For now – the EU is one AfD win away from following in America's footsteps.
    • krzyk 7mo ago
      AfD is a party in single country in EU.
      • nozzlegear 7mo ago
        AfD is a far right populist party in the EU's biggest economic powerhouse country, whose explicit goals are to leave the EU (they probably can't due to the German constitution), exit the eurozone, withdraw from the Paris climate deal, leave NATO, and cozy up with Russia. It's not hard to imagine what kind of damage they could do to the EU if they took power in Germany and started working with Hungary to block EU legislation, veto sanctions, defund programs, etc.
    • tensor 7mo ago
      The EU governance system is vastly different than the US, and not nearly as fragile. Even if AfD gets sway in one country, it doesn't mean that suddenly they can do anything they want like you saw in the last US election. My understanding of the EU system is that it's far more proportional in representation, and a simple 51% isn't enough to have 100% control. Parties still need to work together and compromise.
      • nozzlegear 7mo ago
        > My understanding of the EU system is that it's far more proportional in representation, and a simple 51% isn't enough to have 100% control. Parties still need to work together and compromise. We've already seen with Brexit that 100% control is not needed in a parliamentary system to destroy a country's livelihood. But my point was that AfD doesn't need something like "presidential control" of the EU, it would just need to start working with other far-right parties in the EU such as Hungary and France's RN to sow chaos from within. Is that very far-fetched? You can't tell me that most of Europe doesn't hold its collective breath at every French election, crossing their fingers that Le Pen's party doesn't win this go around.
• deleted 7mo ago
  [deleted]
• Rygian 7mo ago
  Valid question, which must be put in the context of US-based providers willingly satisfying US out-of-jurisdiction search requests for EU data without even letting the EU know about it. (And when the providers are not willing, they can be forced by U.S. Cloud Act) https://www.forbes.com/sites/emmawoollacott/2025/07/22/microsoft-cant-keep-eu-data-safe-from-us-authorities/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/emmawoollacott/2025/07/22/micro...
• deaux 7mo ago
  This isn't a downside against EU services when compared to the US, so what are you actually suggesting? Don't just vaguely hint at stuff. Should we be moving to Singaporean services? Oh shit, similar concerns there. Okay, where do you suggest we move? If you don't have any suggestions then there's little substance behind what you're saying.
  • _osud 7mo ago
    >This isn't a point against EU services compared to the US In the US the cops actually need a search warrant signed by a judge. In the EU they only sometimes need one. >Should we be moving to Singaporean services? Oh shit, similar concerns there Really? I've always been under the impression that it is courts who issue search warrants in Singapore, not the police or prosecutors.
    • not_that_d 7mo ago
      Does ICE needs something?
      • deleted 7mo ago
        [deleted]
      • deleted 7mo ago
        [deleted]
      • _osud 7mo ago
        Internal combustion engine? Hydrocarbons, I guess.
    • generic92034 7mo ago
      A judge of a secret court, which are known to never deny any request?
      • _osud 7mo ago
        This is simply not correct. Very few "cops" in the US can go to any kind of secret courts. Also, what you're describing is still infinitely better than the European system! The cops get to issue the warrants themselves.
• surgical_fire 7mo ago
  Generally comfortable. While the EIO is s controversial instrument (I particularly dislike the excessive power it gives to authorities in issuing countries and the inability to question the warrant), it at least is something that happens as part of a judicial process. I'm certainly more comfortable with it than being subject to the whims of the US government and its 3 letter agencies. That said, yeah, EIO in the shape it exists is bad.
  • _osud 7mo ago
    >it at least is something that happens as part of a judicial process Only sort of, because some countries have very weird ideas of what a "judicial process" is. >I'm certainly more comfortable with it than being subject to the whims of the US government and its 3 letter agencies. That's fair, but I think it's a mistake. In the worst case the European system grants a village cop in another country the authority to conduct extremely intrusive surveillance on you. Criminals can easily co-opt this system and steal your crypto or whatever, a far more realistic threat for most people than the NSA.
    • deleted 7mo ago
      [deleted]
    • surgical_fire 7mo ago
      > That's fair, but I think it's a mistake I obviously don't share the sentiment. > village cop in another country the authority to conduct extremely intrusive surveillance on you. > far more realistic threat for most people than the NSA. If you think some policeman in a rural Frech village is a bigger threat to your freedom than NSA or other 3-letter agencies from the USA, we can all see who is mistaken in evaluating threats. > Criminals can easily co-opt this system and steal your crypto or whatever I don't want to say anything, I just wanted to highlight this bit because it made me giggle.
      • _osud 7mo ago
        >If you think some policeman in a rural Frech village is a bigger threat to your freedom than NSA or other 3-letter agencies from the USA, we can all see who is mistaken in evaluating threats. Just like the random mugger on the streets of Paris is a far bigger threat to my life and limb than the US with their drones. You're talking from an ideological perspective, I'm looking at this from a rather more practical angle. It's very possible that your line of thinking leads to a better outcome than mine, or perhaps it doesn't. >I don't want to say anything, I just wanted to highlight this bit because it made me giggle. It's really not that funny, cryptocurrency thieves have been bribing cops to rob people at gunpoint https://krebsonsecurity.com/2024/09/crooked-cops-stolen-laptops-the-ghost-of-ugnazi/ https://krebsonsecurity.com/2024/09/crooked-cops-stolen-lapt... Now you can bribe a village cop in Hungary or Romania, and have the French cops do your bidding. This is totally gonna end well!
• throw0101c 7mo ago
  > How comfortable are you guys with the fact that EU countries allow prosecutors and sometimes even police officers to issue their own search warrants without meaningful judicial review? (IANAL.) This was reviewed by the courts themselves: > The CJEU confirmed that the Belgian, French and Swedish prosecutors were sufficiently independent from the executive to be able to issue EAWs. […] > […] Public prosecutors will qualify as an issuing judicial authority where two conditions are met: […] > 2. Second, public prosecutors must be in a position to act in an independent way, specifically with respect to the executive. The CJEU requires that the independence of public prosecutors be organised by a statutory framework and organisational rules that prevent the risk of prosecutors being subject to individual instructions by the executive (as was the case with the German prosecutor). Moreover, the framework must enable prosecutors to assess the necessity and proportionality of issuing an EAW. In the French prosecutor judgment, the CJEU specifically indicated that: * https://www.fairtrials.org/articles/legal-analysis/can-belgian-french-and-swedish-prosecutors-issue-european-arrest-warrants/ https://www.fairtrials.org/articles/legal-analysis/can-belgi... The question that the OP asks is fair enough, but there's a lot of subtly and 'low-level' details on how things operate compared to the high-level question that is being asked. Also depends on where the OP lives and what he's used to: common law (UK/US/CA/etc) and civil law procedures and laws are (AIUI) quite different.
  • Aerroon 7mo ago
    For anyone wondering: EAW = European Arrest Warrant EIO = European Investigative Order (basically lets different jurisdictions demand information from each other) CJEU = Court of Justice of the EU (think of it as a supreme court)
    • stanac 7mo ago
      Also IANAL: I Am Not A Lawyer. If you really want to guard yourself from a legal standpoint, write the full sentence. "IANAL" could mean anything. That being said, I am not a lawyer, I am not a legal professional, this is not a legal advice.
  • deleted 7mo ago
    [deleted]
• mongol 7mo ago
  Sweden is a country like this. It is just the way it is here. It can be abused, sure. But all things considered, I much rather have my things hosted here than in the US.
  • _osud 7mo ago
    Yeah, but you also have Hungary who can decide to do things the same way they're done in Sweden and Finland.
    • mongol 7mo ago
      In Hungary, sure. But each country has its own jurisdiction.
      • _osud 7mo ago
        Yeah, way to not read the thread. I'll repeat: EIO
        • mongol 7mo ago
          So what? Can you point to a real example where this has been abused or are we discussing hypotheticals?
          • _osud 7mo ago
            You can look at past ECHR decisions for countless cases of abuse by various national governments. You can look at the history of EAW related litigation also, it'll probably prove most informative. Executing states used to constantly deny requests due to judicial review, rules were clarified to remove the possibility of judicial review by executing states.
            • deleted 7mo ago
              [deleted]
            • 7mo ago
• bean469 7mo ago
  > How comfortable are you guys with the fact that EU countries allow prosecutors and sometimes even police officers to issue their own search warrants without meaningful judicial review? Just to be clear, according to the DOJ, law enforcement officials in the US can search your home without a warrant if they suspect that you are a "Alien Enemy" [1]. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25915967-doj-march-14-memo-alien-enemies-act/#document/p1 https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25915967-doj-march-1...
  • kvuj 7mo ago
    Wouldn't source that this is happening in 1 of the member states be enough to raise alarms? Why do all of them need to for you to consider this an issue?
  • squarefoot 7mo ago
    Don't forget civil forfeiture, which can (an does) happen whether they think you're an enemy or not. https://ij.org/issues/private-property/civil-forfeiture/frequently-asked-questions-about-civil-forfeiture/ https://ij.org/issues/private-property/civil-forfeiture/freq...
• pjc50 7mo ago
  How much is this a practical rather than theoretical problem? One of the problems with being on the US Internet is that we get lots of coverage of US police overreach and much less coverage of EU police overreach. That could have one of three causes: - actual incidence is low - it's not being reported - it is being reported, but doesn't generate discourse (And the counter option: sometimes when you do hear about it, it's been laundered through weird US right-wing politics, like almost anything anyone says about Sweden)
  • aleph_minus_one 7mo ago
    > That could have one of three causes: > - actual incidence is low > - it's not being reported > - it is being reported, but doesn't generate discourse Fourth possible cause: - the EU has 24 official languages i.e. when it is reported, the number of people who are actually capable of understanding the reporting is only a fraction and rather localized.
  • _osud 7mo ago
    [dead]
  • megous 7mo ago
    Well https://www.devever.net/~hl/xmpp-incident https://www.devever.net/~hl/xmpp-incident It's a problem. But it has technical rather than political solutions.
• s_dev 7mo ago
  >How comfortable are you guys with the fact that EU countries allow prosecutors and sometimes even police officers to issue their own search warrants without meaningful judicial review? This is a hilarious 'just asking questions' concern that doesn't address the complete 180 in direction the US is taking and descending in to authoritarianism while moving against the world order it primarily helped build post WWII while threatening other liberal democracies like Canada and Denmark with invasions. It's a complete false equivalence. ICE agents have straight up murdered two US citizens in broad daylight without consequence and you're querying the nature of some search warrants in the EU.
  • _osud 7mo ago
    I'm not advertising the US here or trying to troll. I'm an European pointing out things about the European system that many here will not have thought about. >It's a complete false equivalence. ICE agents have straight up murdered two US citizens in broad daylight without consequence and you're querying the nature of some search warrants in the EU. Maybe keep your US nonsense to yourself?
    • hvb2 7mo ago
      Just saying, the vast majority of services people are moving from would be US based given it is where all of big tech comes from. So comparing it to the US is relevant? If you're trying to say the eu isn't a saint either, sure.
      • _osud 7mo ago
        >If you're trying to say the eu isn't a saint either, sure. I'm not trying to say anything about anyone else besides the EU. Therefore I'm certainly not trying to compare EU to anyone else. I am an European pointing out issues with the local system, issues that many commenters here clearly aren't aware of given how many replies seem to think that they'll be just fine as long as they don't host in Hungary.
    • y-curious 7mo ago
      I’m in the US and generally pretty level-headed. Nothing makes me become a red-blooded patriot nationalist temporarily faster than seeing Europeans completely ignore the similarities in our political ills. It always boils down to, “but it’s the good kind of authoritarianism we have that preserves social order!!!” as if that has never failed to produce desired results. Thanks for being much more rational. We have a concerning political trend here in the US, it can’t be denied, but the EU is following in step.
• nottorp 7mo ago
  US legal protections do not apply to EU citizens keeping their data in the US, do they? So what's the point of this comparison, since if I host my data in the US they don't need a warrant at all?
  • PeterStuer 7mo ago
    The geo-location of where you keep your data is irrelevant to US legal reach.
  • paganel 7mo ago
    They don't, they don't even apply to EU citizens keeping their (our, in fact) data on our (EU's servers) if what we're doing happens to cross some interests of the US Government. I mean, there are some legal "protections" in place for that, but notice the quotes. Thinking otherwise is delusional, but, hey, people should be allowed to enjoy the liberty of their slightly larger iron bird-cage.
• shevy-java 7mo ago
  > you might be in a reasonable EU country and still be hit with an EIO from one of the unreasonable countries. Are you certain this has happened? I never heard that happen in central Europe. I am pretty certain legislation of other countries is irrelevant, unless it would be an EU regulation - and I am unaware of an EU regulation that could bypass local laws and that has not been made a EU law. Which EU law specifically do you refer to?
  • _osud 7mo ago
    https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014L0041&from=EN https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELE...
• dangus 7mo ago
  Maybe the motivation is more to stop giving American big tech MAGA fascists money rather than any kind of gain in privacy/security against state level law enforcement.
• heavyset_go 7mo ago
  > What Is An Administrative Warrant? > An administrative warrant is a legal document issued by a government agency, rather than a court, that authorizes the agency to take specific actions such as conducting inspections, searches, or seizing property. Unlike judicial warrants, administrative warrants are frequently issued on less than probable cause of a crime. > Administrative warrants are typically used for regulatory or civil enforcement purposes and allow agencies to enforce rules and regulations within their jurisdiction, such as health inspections, building code enforcement, or immigration-related actions. > The problem with administrative warrants is that they make the agency both the prosecutor and the judge in the very same matter. The entire point of having agencies go to court for a warrant is because courts are an independent branch with an independent mission. Rather than solely focusing on identifying and prosecuting violations of law, courts seek to check agency errors and overreach. When the very same agency that wants to execute a warrant is the one deciding whether it issues, those checks disappear, and Americans’ security pays the price. https://ij.org/issues/ijs-project-on-the-4th-amendment/administrative-warrants/ https://ij.org/issues/ijs-project-on-the-4th-amendment/admin...
• watwut 7mo ago
  > Some EU courts will not exclude illegally obtained evidence either, so challenging the warrant later on will be pointless. Generally speaking, I trust EU countries criminal systems more then USA one. USA one is too procedure oriented - like for example with this rule. Unlike in USA, in general European cops and prosecutors can be punished when they do illegal stuff. That provides better protection then the pretend fairness rule you just cited.
  • _osud 7mo ago
    >Generally speaking, I trust EU countries criminal systems more then USA one. USA one is too procedure oriented - like for example with this rule. Those procedures are written in blood
    • watwut 7mo ago
      They are not and also dont do much to protect you. Untouchable cops due to qualified immunity and presumption of reguparity and simple fact that there is no remedy if they break your rights make this entirely moot. Just now, like today, a decision was made that cops who literally made up a gang to go after innocent people ... wont be investigated. Pretending you found proofs legally when you did not is easy. Especially when you are untouchable. And the rule does absolutely nothing to protect innocent people. It is just trying to make up for one injustice by creating another smaller one.
• FabCH 7mo ago
  You are technically correct but seem to be applying common law standards to civil law countries. Unlike common law judiciary, civil law judiciary in and of itself has investigatory powers and judges don’t just hear arguments but can order their own investigations and are significantly more independent than in common law. This can cut both ways, yes in theory the judge can accept evidence the prosecution obtained illegally, but the judges can also call the prosecutions bluff and call their own witnesses or order an independent expert to provide their own opinion, even if defense is unable to.
  • _osud 7mo ago
    You forgot about the Nordic countries.
    • FabCH 7mo ago
      Scandinavian law is commonly considered to be a subcategory of civil law. Judges in Scandinavia have investigative powers and can judge the truth of the matter.
      • ohhman11 7mo ago
        >Scandinavian law is commonly considered to be a subcategory of civil law Their judiciaries are very different from how you describe civil law systems. >Judges in Scandinavia have investigative powers and can judge the truth of the matter. This is, at best, technically correct. While Judges in Nordic countries tend to technically have some limited investigative powers, it is extraordinarily unusual for them to be used in any meaningful capacity. In reality the investigate powers wielded by judges in Nordic countries tend to be the same as in common law countries, asking a question here and there during the hearing to make sure they're keeping up. These countries are certainly not at all like France or Spain where you might have examining magistrates, criminal investigations are run by the police and prosecutors.
        • FabCH 7mo ago
          Note that original discussion was discussing extraordinary unusual circumstances already. This isn’t your average „my neighbor built a fence and damaged my tree“ case. In such cases, the technical differences between fully adversarial common law systems and mixed-but-still-some-inquisitive-powers systems like the Nordic law matters. And of course it is not exactly like Napoleonic law countries. Also, the police still runs investigations, even in France. It’s just that the judges can choose to not believe the police. Famously, even if you sign a confession they can say they don’t believe it.
• zulban 7mo ago
  Not comfortable. But making choices in the real world is about choosing the best option, not the perfect option.
• PurpleRamen 7mo ago
  As long as you stay away from questionable behaviour, there is very little chance to encounter the police in the EU or having problems with your privacy. USA is different in that regard. Your existence can be a problem. Or monetary interests will risk your privacy to whoever wants to make money with you. EU is not perfect, but saver than the USA in those matters (if you want to only invest a reasonable amount of effort and money), which is kinda the point here, isn't it?
  • _osud 7mo ago
    EU is not a single uniform blob. There are neighbourhoods where you have to worry about being shot, and there are neighbourhoods where people leave their keys inside their cars. So, with the police? YMMV.
    • PurpleRamen 7mo ago
      Obviously, but we are talking about online-activity here, not randomly walking the streets. The normal sketchy cop on the streets will not be accessing your mailbox just because they don't like your skin. Attending certain events would trigger this more likely, but then you should also know how to protect yourself in those cases.
• rich_sasha 7mo ago
  Without disagreeing at all, can you think of a major jurisdiction that's better? US I basically assume everything is searchable without a warrant, if not leaked on a ex-DOGE intern USB stick. Who else is there with a major infra ecosystem? Russia? China? UK? Not sure these are better than EU. Japan seems quite inward looking.
• danilocesar 7mo ago
  Whataboutyism much?
  • _osud 7mo ago
    [flagged]
• kgwxd 7mo ago
  Sounds terrible. Guess we should all just accept the worst of the worst and shut up?
• XCSme 7mo ago
  How comfortable are you guys with the fact the US has just partnered with OpenAI to enable mass surveillance?
• mafuy 7mo ago
  This account is sockpuppeting. They are not participating on this site in good faith.
  • _osud 7mo ago
    [flagged]
• victorbjorklund 7mo ago
  Do you seriously think that US requires warrants from US judges to spy on non-citizens abroad? That is 100% false. There is zero protection from the US govt for non-citizens living abroad.
• NoLinkToMe 7mo ago
  I'd say don't let perfect be the enemy of good/better. Moving from US to EU is a move for the better. But EU isn't perfect, and there might be even better options available, but unless you have them, I'd recommend starting with the move to EU.
• deleted 7mo ago
  [deleted]
• tamimio 7mo ago
  It’s why I don’t trust anyone. Sure, EU has better policies and regulations than the wild west (US/Canada), but they still can and will do monkey business when needed, and they are more twisted about it than the US. The best strategy is to host your own and encrypt all, if it’s too much effort for some services try to use one from a country that has no interest in you (outside the west for example).