The Specificity in Interpreting the Requirements for the Interception of Telephone Communications in Corruption Offenses

Abstract

This study proposes an interpretation of the first two requirements established by infraconstitutional legislation for the interception of telephone communications in corruption offenses in a broad sense, namely: the existence of reasonable indications of authorship or participation in criminal conduct, and the demonstration that the evidence cannot be obtained through other available means. The article presents particular characteristics of corruption offenses in comparison to other crimes, which may justify a more flexible application of the right to privacy—protecting the confidentiality of telephone communications—in specific cases, thereby allowing greater emphasis on the effectiveness of criminal law enforcement. Drawing on Robert Alexy’s theory of the balancing of fundamental principles, the study seeks to interpret the expressions “reasonable indications of authorship or participation” and “other available means” within the context of corruption offenses. It argues that the assessment of the requirements for telephone interception must be conducted on a case-by-case basis, aiming to achieve an optimal balancing of competing principles.