By: Sara Adams
Impunity Watch News Reporter, Europe

STRASBOURG, France – The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled against employers surveilling their employees internet use earlier this month.

The ruling, released the first week of September, held that employers must notify employees that their emails and other internet usage may be monitored.

The case has been in the works since 2007, when instant messaging and e-mailing was growing in popularity.

A man in Romania, Bogdan Barbulescu, was terminated from his job when his employer discovered he was using the company’s messaging system to communicate with family members.

Mr. Barbulescu’s superiors brought printouts of the private messages, some of which were intimate, to prove that he was violating the company’s policy against private messaging during work hours.

Mr. Barbulsecu brought suit in Romanian court, alleging that the company violated Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which guarantees “respect for private and family correspondence.”

The Romanian court dismissed his claim. When the lower ECHR chambers ruled against him, finding no violation of privacy, Mr. Barbulescu appealed to the higher chambers.

There, the judges ruled in his favor 11-6, finding that the Romanian judges were incorrect when they dismissed Mr. Barbulescu’s case.

Even though Mr. Barculsecu was aware of the limitations on workplace internet use, the Court reasoned that this was not enough to substantiate such a violation of privacy.

“Although it was questionable whether Mr. Barculescu could have had a reasonable expectation of private in view of his employer’s restrictions on internet use, of which he had been informed, an employer’s instructions could not reduce private social life in the workplace to zero,” the court wrote.

Further, it was questionable what the company’s motives were for monitoring Mr. Barculsecu’s private correspondence in the first place. No evidence was presented by the company that explained why the company was investigating.

The landmark decision calls into question how far the right to privacy goes in Europe.

“It does not [generally] prohibit monitoring [of communications],” said Esther Lynch, the European Trade Union’s confederal secretary. Instead, she says it “sets high thresholds for its justification.”

“This is a very important step to better protect worker’s privacy.”

While the ECHR does not have the power to create legislation, its rulings set precedent used to guide national courts when they are tasked with interpreting the European Convention.

France, in particular, has represented to the court that the decision will carry implications on privacy and employment law. It may effectively bar employer’s ability to terminate employees over private communications.

For more information, please see:

The Telegraph – Landmark European ruling heralds end of snooping bosses spying on worker’s emails and instant chats – 5 September 2017

The New York Times – European Court Limits Employers’ Right to Monitor Worker’s Email – 5 September 2017

BBC News – ECHR court reverses ruling on sacking over private messages – 5 September 2017

Reuters – European court rules companies must tell employees of email checks – 5 September 2017

The Guardian – Employers’ rights to monitor office emails to be decided by European court – 4 September 2017

By Jenilyn Brhel
Impunity Watch Reporter, Europe

BUDAPEST, Hungary – After the European Union on September 6th dismissed Hungary and Slovakia’s challenge against mandatory migrant quotas, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban vowed to continue fighting.

The ruling issued by the EU reaffirms the requirement that EU members provide refuge for a specified share of asylum-seekers reaching Europe. Under the plan, Syrian, Iraqi and Eritrean refugees escaping violence in the Middle East and Africa are to be spread among the 28 member states of the EU. Hungary is required to take in 1,294 of these refugees. If they do not abide by the ruling, the EU has the right to impose fines.

The Mediterranean migrant crisis of 2015 prompted the EU to enact mandatory quotas for those seeking asylum. The initial purpose of the quotas was to ease the burden on Italy and Greece, as these countries were at the time being inundated. The number of migrants has since declined, which has made noncompliance easier for member-states opposed to the quota.

Prime Minister Orban maintains that Hungary is under no obligation to let anyone in.  “These countries with colonial legacy, which have become immigrant countries by now, want to impose on us Central Europeans their own logic … but Hungary does not want to become an immigrant country,” Orban said.

During the height of the migrant crisis, Budapest installed border fences and hired border police to patrol the fences to keep migrants out. Orban last month requested reimbursement funds from the EU for these measures. He has since been chided by the European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker for this request and for failing to participate in the quota scheme.

This is not the first time that Hungary has been criticized. In July 2016, Human Rights Watch cited Hungary’s treatment of detained refugees and migrants as “breaking all the rules of asylum seekers.”

Orban believes that enforcement of the quota scheme “raises a very serious question of principles: whether we are an alliance of European free nations with the Commission representing our joint interests, or a European empire which has its center in Brussels and which can issue orders.”

This opposition is in contrast to Hungary’s position in 1989, when it allowed those under communist-ruled Eastern Europe to pass freely through its borders. At that time, Hungary declared that it was following “generally accepted international principles of human rights and humanitarian consideration.”

Since the current compulsory quota scheme was enacted, Hungary has not accepted a single refugee.

For more information, please see:

Aljazeera – Hungary to Fight EU Migrant Quotas Despite Setback – 8 September 2017

Anadolu Agency – Hungary Declares ‘Political Fight’ Over EU Ruling – 8 September 2017

Reuters – Hungarian PM Orban Says Will Fight After EU Ruling on Migrant Quota – 8 September 2017

The New York Times – Hungary is Making Europe’s Migrant Crisis Worse – 8 September 2017

The Washington Post –  Hungary and Slovakia Challenged Europe’s Refugee Scheme. They Just Lost Badly. – 8 September 2017

The New York Times – E.U. Countries Must Accept Their Share of Migrants, Court Rules – 6 September 2017

By Jenilyn Brhel
Impunity Watch Reporter, Europe

ROME, Italy – Two Italian Carabinieri officers have been suspended amid allegations they raped two US students in Florence.

On Friday, September 8, Italy’s defense minister Roberta Pinotti attended a forum on women’s issues in Milan where she stated that “investigation is still underway, but there is some basis in respect to the allegations.”

The rapes reportedly occurred in the early morning hours of September 7th.

Earlier, the women, ages 19 and 21, spent time at a nightclub in Florence. Patrol cars were called to the scene to investigate a fight that had broken out at the club. Two of the three patrol cars departed after the fight had been handled.

After the women were unsuccessful in their efforts to find a taxi, the remaining officers, who were in uniform at the time, offered to drive them home. Witnesses confirmed seeing the women enter the patrol car.

Upon arriving to the residence, the officers allegedly raped the women before they could reach their rooms. The women told investigators they were too frightened to scream during the assault.

Prosecutors in Florence are investigating the incident and have conducted DNA tests to verify the accusations. The results of those tests are pending.

The United State Embassy in Rome declined to comment on the situation “due to the sensitive nature of this case and to protect the privacy of those involved.”

The accused officers have been suspended on a precautionary basis while the investigation continues. The Carabinieri provincial officer command stated that the suspension is separate from the Florence prosecutors’ investigation into the criminal allegations.

In addition to the rape charges, the officers face disciplinary charges from driving the women home without notifying superiors.

“Rape is always a serious matter. But it’s of unprecedented seriousness if it is committed by Carabinieri in uniform, because citizens turn to them and to their uniform to have assurances and security” Pinotti said at the women’s forum.

The paramilitary Carabinieri are one of two of Italy’s main police forces, the other being the state police. The Carabinieri report to the Defense Ministry.

“If this is true, and I hope that light is shed on the matter as soon as possible, then it would be an act of unheard of gravity” said Tullio Del Sette, head of the army.

For more information, please see:

Time – 2 U.S. Students say They Were Raped by Policemen in Italy – 8 September 2017

New York Times – Two American Students Accuse Italian Police of Rape – 9 September 2017

Reuters – U.S. Students’ Rape Allegation has ‘Some Basis’, Minister Says – 9 September 2017

Washington Post – 2 Italian Police Suspended After Alleged Rape of US Students – 9 September 2017

By: Sara Adams
Impunity Watch News Reporter, Europe

LUXEMBOURG, Luxembourg – The European Court of Justice (“ECJ”) ruled September 7th in favor of the European Union’s migrant redistribution scheme.

The case was brought by Hungary and Slovakia, two members of the European Union that have refused to take their share of the migrants flooding into the European continent.

The two countries have been at odds with the governing body of the EU since September 2015, when the relocation plan passed. EU member countries have since been required to take their portion of refugees and migrants from Greece and Italy.

Hungary, Slovakia, Romania, the Czech Republic, and Poland all voted against the relocation plan. Among the four countries, only Slovakia accepted any refugees, but not enough to meet their quota.

Migrant and refugee concerns have grown to become a largely divisive issue within the European Union.

Since the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union in June 2016, far-right politics has spread through the European mainland, mostly revolving around anti-immigration, isolationist policy points.

Heinz-Christian Strache, leader of Austria’s far-right Freedom Party, criticized the decision by the ECJ, saying that it is a way of taking away state “right[s] to self-determination and decision-making when it comes to receiving [asylum-seekers].”

Hungary’s foreign minister Peter Szijjarto took harsher words to describe the binding decision by the court, stating that “politics has raped European law and values.”

But the EU Migration Commissioner, Dimitris Avramopoulos, stands by the ECJ’s ruling. He called for unity on Twitter, saying it is “time to work in unity and implement solidarity in full.”

If the countries fail to comply with the binding order of the ECJ, the threat of further legal action hovers. The European Commission, the EU’s executive, has already brought action against Hungary, Poland, and the Czech Republic for their failure to comply with the mandatory relocation program.

They may face heavy fines if they do not comport with the new decision.

The fate of the asylum-seekers also rests in the hands of the five European Union member states who have resisted compliance.

Since August 30^th, only 27,412 asylum seekers in Greece and Italy have been transferred to 24 other countries. The relocation scheme called for relocating 120,000.

Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban has specifically called out Brussels, the center of the EU government, for actions he believe violate state sovereignty.

“[The question is raised] of principles: Whether we are an alliance of European free nations with the commission representing our interests, or a European empire which has its center in Brussels and which can issue such orders,” Mr. Orban said in a statement. “The real battle is just beginning.”

For more information, please see:

The Washington Post – Hungary and Slovakia challenged Europe’s refugee scheme. They just lots badly. – 8 September 2017

Al-Jazeera – Hungary to fight EU migrant quotas despite setback – 8 September 2017

Reuters – Austria’s Freedom Party Criticizes ECJ Ruling on Migrant Quotas – 7 September 2017

BBC News – Europe migrant crisis: EU court rejects quota challenge – 6 September 2017

The Guardian – EU court dismisses complaints by Hungary and Slovakia over refugee quotas – 6 September 2017

The New York Times – E.U. Countries Must Accept Their Share of Migrants, Court Rules – 6 September 2017

CNN – Top EU court rejects Hungary and Slovakia migrant relocation case – 6 September 2017

By: Sara Adams
Impunity Watch News Reporter, Europe

LONDON, United Kingdom – Members of neo-Nazi group National Action were arrested on September 5th under charges stemming from the Terror Act of 2000.

The four men arrested are all serving members of the British Royal Army.  A fifth person, a civilian, has been arrested on the same charge.

National Action was labeled a terror organization in December 2016 by the Home Secretary, Amber Rudd. Subsequently, an order was released by Parliament to make it a criminal offense to be affiliated in any way with National Action.

The group is the first of its kind to be banned outright in the United Kingdom. The majority of the groups banned under the Terror Act of 2000 are extreme Islamists.

When the decision was made, Ms. Rudd released a statement openly condemning National Action, saying that it is a “racist, anti-Semitic, and homophobic organization.”

“It stirs up hatred, glorifies violence, and promotes a vile ideology,” she stated. “I will not stand for it. It has absolutely no place in a Britain that works for everyone.”

White nationalist groups, often coined “alternative-right”, are on the rise around the world.

In August this year, neo-Nazis in the United States descended on Charlottesville, Virginia, to protest the taking down of confederate statutes. One counter-protester died when a car driven by a self-proclaimed Neo-Nazi rammed into her.

But the United States is not the only country that has faced violence from groups affiliated with white supremacy.

Jo Cox, British Member of Parliament for the Labor party, was shot, stabbed, and killed in June 2016. The evidence at trial sought to show that the shooter, Thomas Mair, was involved in alternative-right politics, including affiliation with Neo-Nazis.

At the trial, Mair identified himself to the judge saying “My name is death to traitors, freedom for Britain.”

“Death to traitors” is the same slogan that is on the former National Action website.

National Action was quick to praise the death of Jo Cox. After the news, one tweet by the group’s Twitter page read “Only 649 MPs to go.”

The Terror Act of 2000 permits arresting those suspected of being members in proscribed terror groups. While there was no imminent threat of danger to the public, the police said that the arrests were “pre-planned” and “intelligence-led.”

Four of the detainees are being held at West Midlands police station. The other is being held in Cyprus at the British army base.

The Army could only confirm that the arrests were made under the Terror Act. Any further comment was denied, stating that this is “now the subject of a civilian police investigation.”

The results of the investigation remain to be seen.

For more information, please see:

The Guardian – Five army men held over alleged membership of banned UK neo-Nazi group – 5 September 2017

CBS News – 4 alleged neo-Nazi soldiers accused of plotting terror – 5 September 2017

BBC News – Neo-Nazi arrests: National Action suspects are in the Army – 5 September 2017

CNN – Jo Cox’s husband remembers her death, one year on – 16 June 2017

BBC News – Far-right group National Action to be banned under terror laws – 12 December 2016

The Guardian – Jo Cox killed in ‘brutal, cowardly’ and politically motivated murder, trial hears – 14 November 2016