Situations Where Search and Seizure Are Possible Without a Warrant
The United States Congress recognized the need to assure citizens that their right to privacy would not be violated. The State of Massachusetts was the first colony to make laws that protected the privacy of the citizenry. The 1756 laws outlawed the use of general warrants which had posed a serious problem especially after attempts to enact the Excise Act of 1754. James Otis represented a group of merchants who petitioned the court to examine the issues of general warrants and writs of assistance. Although the court ruled in favor of the law, Otis won the election to the Massachusetts Colonial Legislature where he played a significant role in passing legislation that required writs of assistance to be issued by judges or justices.
Gershowitz, 2016). “The emergence of digital communication networks on a global scale; emerging technologies for protecting communications and personal identity; new digital media that support a wide range of social relationships” are just a few of the ways in which people are asked to forfeit personal information in exchange for access to technology that will keep them “in the loop.”
One solution may be the addition of a Protocol to the treaty, modeled after the proposed CoE Constitution providing minimal guidelines for procedural due process, extended to citizens of all participating nations. In this way, the CoE Convention on Cybercrime could become a blueprint for future international endeavors to harmonize penal law enforcement.
Adam M. Gershowitz, The Post-Riley Search Warrant: Search Protocols and Particularly in Cell Phone Searches 69 VANDERBILT L. REV. 585, 596 (2016)
Philip E. Agre and Marc Rotenberg eds., Introduction, TECHNOLOGY AND PRIVACY: THE NEW LANDSCAPE 1 (MIT Press 1997).
Daniel Solove, Understanding Privacy 4 (Harvard University Press 1st ed. 2008).