Laimis wrote: > http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2008/2177.html > > Jei tingisi skaityti, tai Lino minėtu atveju: > > „the Court of Appeal ruled that an order to deliver encryption keys > under art. 53 RIPA did not violate the privilege against > self-incrimination.“ Gera byla, bet va nezinau is kur paemei ta isvada, nes paciame tekste pasakyta toli grazu ne taip. Siaip tai net neskaicius bylu, vien is teorijos galima pasakyti - reikalavimas atskleisti kodus priestarauja saves neapkaltinimo principui ir to niekaip neisspresi vieno ar kito neatsisakydamas. Ir visos cia buvusios bylos ar nuorodos realiai surasdavo koki nors priezasti, kad pateisinti kodu reikalavima tuo konkreciu atveju, bet niekur nenustate ir nepagrinde bendros taisykles, kad tai nera saves apkaltinimas. Konkreciai sioje byloje esminis momentas yra cia: "In our judgment the correct analysis is that the privilege against self-incrimination may be engaged by a requirement of disclosure of knowledge of the means of access to protected data under compulsion of law. (...) In short, although the appellants' knowledge of the means of access to the data may engage the privilege against self-incrimination, it would only do so if the data itself – which undoubtedly exists independently of the will of the appellants and to which the privilege against self-incrimination does not apply – contains incriminating material. If that data was neutral or innocent, the knowledge of the means of access to it would similarly be either neutral or innocent. On the other hand, if the material were, as we have assumed, incriminatory, it would be open to the trial judge to exclude evidence of the means by which the prosecution gained access to it. Accordingly the extent to which the privilege against self-incrimination may be engaged is indeed very limited." Trumpai tariant - reikalavimas atskleisti kodus skiriasi nuo visu kitu reikalavimu (pavyzdziui kraujo, pirstu antspaudu ir t.t.), kad cia reikalaujama itariamojo ziniu, o ne paprasto mechaninio veiksmo ir tai yra saves apkaltinimas. Todel surandama paprasta iseitis - jei tokiu budu bus surasta nusikaltamos medziagos, tada jos tiesiog nebus galima naudoti kaip irodymo teisme ir tokiu atveju reikalavimas patampa legalus. Taip kad, kaip jau sakiau, saves neapkaltinimo principas laimi, o kodu reikalavimas paliekamas galioti, pazeminus ji iki operatyvines medziagos, negalimos naudoti teisme, statuso. Bet, manau, pacio istatymo tikslas buvo ne toks, todel reikia laukti bylos, kur kas nors realiai bus nuteistas pagal atkoduota informacija, va tada teismas gales galutinai pasisakyti, ar apverciam teises sistema aukstyn kojom ir panaikinam saves neapkaltinimo principa, ar vistik pamaikinam kodu reikalavima.