Evidentiary Value of Data from Cross-Border Interception and Transfer in EU Cooperation Law in Criminal Matters: Case Example of the Operation Encrochat

Öz

This study examines the legal framework of European Union cooperation law in criminal matters with regard to the investigative measures employed in the Encrochat operation, particularly the evidentiary value of materials obtained through cross-border interception of communications and subsequently transferred across borders. The article first outlines Encrochat’s technical structure, its appeal to criminal organizations, and the 2020 international operation led by France and the Netherlands. It then considers the legal framework and implementation of the three main cooperation instruments employed: joint investigation teams (JITs), spontaneous exchange of information, and the European Investigation Order (EIO). Particular attention is given to the evidentiary use of intercepted data under national law—especially German criminal procedure law—and EU law, with a focus on proportionality and legality. The analysis addresses issues such as the protection of private life, ordre public, and fair trial guarantees, drawing on case law from the German Constitutional Court, the Federal Court of Justice, the Berlin Regional Court, and the CJEU, as well as academic commentary. The study concludes that while the Encrochat operation highlights the potential of technology and international cooperation against organized crime, it also exposes significant legal tensions concerning fundamental rights and procedural safeguards.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Encrochat
• Cross-border Interception of Telecommunication
• Judicial Cooperation

AB Cezai Konularda İş Birliği Hukukunda Telekomünikasyon Verilerinin Sınır Ötesi Elde Edilmesi, Aktarımı Ve Delil Değeri: Encrochat Operasyonu Örneği

Öz

Bu çalışma, Encrochat operasyonunda başvurulan soruşturma tedbirlerinin cezai konularda Avrupa Birliği (AB) iş birliği hukukundaki yasal altyapısını, özellikle telekomünikasyon verilerinin sınır ötesinde elde edilmesi ve sınır ötesine aktarılan bu verilerin delil değerini ve bu bağlamda ortaya çıkan diğer hukuki tartışmaları incelemektedir. Makalede öncelikle Encrochat’in teknik yapısı, suç örgütleri tarafından tercih edilme nedenleri ve 2020 yılında Fransa ile Hollanda öncülüğünde yürütülen uluslararası operasyonun seyri ele alınmıştır. Ardından, operasyonda başvurulan üç temel iş birliği enstrümanı olan ortak soruşturma ekipleri (JITs), spontane bilgi paylaşımı ve Avrupa Soruşturma Emri’nin (ASE) hukuki altyapısı ve Encrochat operasyonundaki uygulamaları incelenmiştir. Çalışmanın hukuki tartışmalar bölümünde, elde edilen verilerin hem ulusal hukuk (özellikle Alman ceza muhakemesi hukuku) hem de AB hukuku bakımından geçerliliği, ölçülülük ilkesi, anayasal çekirdek alan koruması, kamu düzeni ve adil yargılanma hakkı ekseninde, Alman Anayasa Mahkemesi (BverfG), Alman Federal Yargıtayı (BGH), Berlin Eyalet Mahkemesi ve Avrupa Birliği Adalet Divanı (ABAD) kararları ile doktrindeki görüşler doğrultusunda karşılaştırmalı olarak incelenmiştir. Sonuç bölümünde, Encrochat operasyonunun organize suçla mücadelede teknoloji ve uluslararası iş birliğinin etkinliğini ispatladığı, ancak delil elde etme ve kullanma süreçlerinin temel haklar ve usulî güvenceler açısından ciddi hukuki tartışmalara kapı araladığı tespit edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Encrochat
• Sınır Ötesi İletişim Dinleme
• Adli İş Birliği

Kaynakça

1. 01net. (2020, 2 Temmuz). Comment les gendarmes ont siphonné Encrochat, la messagerie chiffrée des criminels. https://www.01net.com/actualites/comment-les-gendarmes-ontsiphonne-encrochat-la-messagerie-chiffree-des-criminels-1942589.html Erişim tarihi: 24 Aralık 2024. google scholar
2. Ambos, K. (2018). European Criminal Law, Cambridge University Press. google scholar
3. Avrupa Birliğinde Cezaî Konularda Uluslararası Adlî İş Birliği, Adalet Bakanlığı Dış İlişkiler ve Avrupa Birliği Genel Müdürlüğü Yayını, Editör: Ahmet Ulutaş, Ankara: Eylül 2021. google scholar
4. Böse, M. (2002). Verwertung im Ausland gewonnenner Beweismittel im deutschen Strafverfahren. Zeitschrift für die gesamte Strafrechtswissenschaft (ZStW), 114. google scholar
5. Casino, F., Pina, C., López‑Aguilar, P., Batista, E., Solanas, A. & Patsakis, C. (2022). SoK: Cross‑Border Criminal Investigations and Digital Evidence, Journal of Cybersecurity, Volume 8, Issue 1, 1-18. google scholar
6. Council of Europe Cybercrime Convention Committee. (2025). Report on Practices regarding spontaneous information and MLA. google scholar
7. Cox, K. (2020, 2 Temmuz). Police infiltrate encrypted phones, arrest hundreds in organized crime bust. ArsTechnica. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/07/police-infiltrate-encrypted-phones-arrest-hundreds-in-organized-crime-bust/ Erişim tarihi: 29 Aralık 2024. google scholar
8. Der Spiegel. (t.y.). Berlin Landgericht lässt Encrochat-Daten nicht zu. https://www.spiegel.de/panorama/justiz/berlin-landgericht- laesst-encrochat-daten-nicht-zu-a-6dd9be2e-f558-40fa-9995-2f8136581f8e Erişim tarihi: 21 Aralık 2024. google scholar

9. EPPO. (2021, 22 Temmuz). Note on EPPO’s participation in JITs (2021/LS-28/JC-RR-LDM). google scholar
10. Eurochannel. (t.y.). 3 famous police operations by Europol. http://www.eurochannel.com/en/3-Famous-Police-Operations-by-Europol.html Erişim tarihi: 21 Aralık 2024. google scholar
11. EuroCoord, EIO Code of Best practices – Proposals for 100 Best Practices, March 2019. google scholar
12. Eurojust. (2023). 5th annual Sirius EU electronic evidence situation report. https://www.eurojust.europa.eu/publication/sirius-eu- electronic-evidence-situation-report-2023 Erişim tarihi: 24 Aralık 2024. google scholar
13. Eurojust. (2020). Encrochat: Dismantling of an encrypted network used by criminal group. https://www.eurojust.europa.eu/ar2020/7- casework-crime-type/72-encrochat-dismantling-encrypted-network-used-criminal-groups Erişim tarihi: 27 Kasım 2024. google scholar
14. Eurojust. (t.y.). JITs network. https://www.eurojust.europa.eu/judicial-cooperation/practitioner-networks/jits-network Erişim tarihi: 16 Şubat 2025. google scholar
15. Eurojust. (2020). Supporting judicial authorities in the use of joint investigation teams factsheet. https://www.eurojust.europa.eu/sites/default/files/assets/2020_06_jits_factsheet_en.pdf Erişim tarihi: 21 Aralık 2024. google scholar
16. Eurojust. (2021). Joint investigation teams: Practical guide. https://www.eurojust.europa.eu/publication/jits-practical-guide Erişim tarihi: 29 Aralık 2024. google scholar
17. Eurojust. (2020). Third JIT evaluation report. https://www.eurojust.europa.eu/publication/third-jit-evaluation-report Erişim tarihi: 21 Aralık 2024. google scholar
18. Europol. (2023, 27 Haziran). Dismantling encrypted criminal Encrochat communications leads to over 6,500 arrests and close to EUR 900 million seized. https://www.europol.europa.eu/media-press/newsroom/news/dismantling-encrypted-criminal-encrochat- communications-leads-to-over-6-500-arrests-and-close-to-eur-900-million-seized Erişim tarihi: 27 Kasım 2024. google scholar
19. Europol. (2020, 2 Temmuz). Dismantling of an encrypted network sends shockwaves through organised crime groups across Europe. https://www.europol.europa.eu/media-press/newsroom/news/dismantling-of-encrypted-network-sends-shockwaves- through-organised-crime-groups-across-europe Erişim tarihi: 21 Aralık 2024. google scholar
20. Europol. (2014, 10 Temmuz). Global action targeting Shylock malware. https://www.europol.europa.eu/media-press/newsroom/news/global-action-targeting-shylock-malware Erişim tarihi: 21 Aralık 2024. google scholar
21. Eurojust. (2021). Annual report 2020: Criminal justice across borders in the EU. https://www.eurojust.europa.eu/publication/annual-report-2020-criminal-justice-across-borders-eu#:~:text=In%202020%2C%20Eurojust%20has%20registered,drugs%20worth%20EUR%203%20billion Erişim tarihi: 21 Aralık 2024. google scholar
22. Gless, S. (2021). Internationales Strafrecht (3. Aufl.). Basel: Helbing Lichtenhahn Verlag. google scholar
23. Hecker, B. (2012). Europäisches Strafrecht (4. Aufl.). Heidelberg: Springer. google scholar
24. Laurer, N. (2018). Informationshilfe im Rahmen der polizeilichen und justiziellen Zusammenarbeit in Strafsachen. Baden-Baden: Nomos. google scholar
25. Leonhardt, A. (2017). Die Europäische Ermittlungsanordnung in Strafsachen. Wiesbaden: Springer. google scholar
26. Mutual Legal Assistance Manual, Council of Europe, Belgrade, 2013. google scholar
27. NL Times. (2024, 28 Şubat). Dutch trio made millions by selling EncroChat encrypted phones to criminals. https://nltimes.nl/2024/02/28/dutch-trio-made-millions-selling-encrochat-encrypted-phones-criminals Erişim tarihi: 28 Temmuz 2025. google scholar
28. Osula, A.M. (2015). Mutual Legal Assistance & Other Mechanisms for Accessing Extraterritorially Located Data, Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology, 9. google scholar
29. Pazarcıklı, N. A. (2024). Avrupa Birliği Cezai Konularda Adli İşbirliği Birimi ile Avrupa Birliği Savcılığı Ofisi Arasındaki İşbirliği İlişkisi 14(1) Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 267-296. google scholar
30. Pisaric, M. (2021). Encrypted mobile phones. In Thematic Conference Proceedings of International Significance (Vol. 11, pp. 183–191). google scholar
31. Scheerhout, J. (2020, 9 Temmuz). The 'secret server' used in the killing of John Kinsella – and what it reveals about the scale of the illegal gun trade in Manchester. Manchester Evening News. https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester- news/secret-server-used-killing-john-18563462 Erişim tarihi: 26 Aralık 2024. google scholar
32. Schuster, F. P. (2006). Verwertbarkeit im Ausland gewonnener Beweise im deutschen Strafprozess. Berlin: Duncker & Humboldt. google scholar
33. Sky News. (2020, 3 Temmuz). Encrochat: What it is, who was running it, and how did criminals get their encrypted phones? https://news.sky.com/story/encrochat-what-it-is-who-was-running-it-and-how-did-criminals-get-their-encrypted- phones-12019678 Erişim tarihi: 29 Aralık 2024. google scholar
34. TRT Haber. (2024, 24 Şubat). Kafes-44 operasyonunda 23 şüpheli tutuklandı. https://www.trthaber.com/haber/turkiye/kafes-44- operasyonunda-23-supheli-tutuklandi-839849.html Erişim tarihi: 7 Ağustos 2025. google scholar
35. UNODC, Trafficking in Persons & Smuggling of Migrants: Guidelines on International Cooperation, 2010. google scholar
36. UNODC & Eurojust. (2024, 4–6 Haziran). UNODC and Eurojust promote joint investigation teams for Central Asian countries. Viyana. https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/organized-crime/CASC/en/news/2024/unodc-and-eurojust-promote-joint-investigation- teams-for-central-asian-countries.html Erişim tarihi: 27 Nisan 2025. google scholar
37. Wahl, T., Riehle, C., & Pingen, A. (2022). News – European Union. eucrim – The European Criminal Law Associations' Forum, 1, 4–37. google scholar
38. Wahl, T. (2022). Germany: Federal Court of Justice confirms use of evidence in Encrochat cases. eucrim, 1, 36–37. google scholar
39. Wahl, T. (2023). AG: Encrochat data can, in principle, be used in criminal proceedings. eucrim, 3, 264–265.google scholar
40. Wahl, T. (2024). ECJ ruled in Encrochat case. eucrim, 1, 40–43. google scholar
41. Wahl, T. (2024). Attempt for second reference for preliminary ruling in Encrochat case. eucrim, 1, 44.google scholar
42. Yang, S., & Tan, Y. (2023). The joint investigation team in Ukraine: Challenges and opportunities for the International Criminal Court. European Papers, 8(3), 1121–1124. google scholar
43. Yılmaz, Y. (2017). Avrupa Birliği Ceza Hukukunda Organize Suçlulukla Mücadele, TAAD, Yıl:8, Sayı:31.google scholar
44. Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters between the Member States of the European Union. (2000). google scholar
45. Council Framework Decision 2002/465/JHA of 13 June 2002 on Joint Investigation Teams. google scholar
46. Council Framework Decision 2003/577/JHA of 22 July 2003 on the execution in the European Union of orders freezing property or evidence. Official Journal L 196, 2 August 2003. google scholar
47. Council Framework Decision 2006/960/JHA of 18 December 2006 on simplifying the exchange of information and intelligence between law enforcement authorities of the Member States of the European Union. Official Journal L 386, 29 December 2006. google scholar
48. Council Framework Decision 2008/978/JHA of 18 December 2008 on the European evidence warrant for the purpose of obtaining objects, documents and data for use in proceedings in criminal matters. Official Journal L 350, 30 December 2008. google scholar
49. Council of the European Union. (2000). Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters between the Member States of the European Union. Official Journal C 197, 12 July 2000. google scholar
50. Directive (EU) 2022/211 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2022 amending Council Framework Decision 2002/465/JHA, as regards its alignment with Union rules on the protection of personal data. google scholar
51. Directive (EU) 2023/977 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 May 2023 on the exchange of information between the law enforcement authorities of Member States and repealing Council Framework Decision 2006/960/JHA. google scholar
52. European Parliament and Council of the European Union. (2014). Directive 2014/41/EU of 3 April 2014 regarding the European Investigation Order in criminal matters. Official Journal L 130, 1 May 2014.google scholar
53. European Parliament and Council of the European Union. (2016). Regulation (EU) 2016/794 of 11 May 2016 on the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol). Official Journal L 135, 24 May 2016. google scholar
54. European Parliament and Council of the European Union. (2018). Regulation (EU) 2018/1727 of 14 November 2018 on the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust). Official Journal L 295, 21 November 2018. google scholar
55. Regulation (EU) 2016/95 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 January 2016 repealing certain acts in the field of police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters. google scholar
56. Bundesgerichtshof (BGH), Beschluss vom 2. März 2022 – 5 StR 457/21. google scholar
57. Bundesverfassungsgericht, Beschluss vom 1 November 2024 – 2 BvR 684/22. google scholar
58. Court of Justice of the European Union. Criminal proceedings against M.N. (Case C‑670/22), ECLI:EU:C:2024:372, 30 April 2024. google scholar
59. Ceza Hukuku ve Kriminoloji Dergisi–Journal of Penal Law and Criminology, (2): 452–481 480 google scholar
60. AB Cezai Konularda İş Birliği Hukukunda Telekomünikasyon Verilerinin Sınır Ötesi Elde Edilmesi, Aktarımı… Külçür & Enes, 2025 google scholar
61. ECtHR, Yalçınkaya v. Türkiye, 26.09.2023, Başvuru No: 15699/20. google scholar
62. Landgericht Berlin, Urteil vom 19.12.2024, I Az.: 525 KLs 8/22 279 Js 30/22 StA Berlin. google scholar
63. A, B, D & C v. Regina [2021] EWCA Crim 128. google scholar