Comment by _osud
4 days ago
How comfortable are you guys with the fact that EU countries allow prosecutors and sometimes even police officers to issue their own search warrants without meaningful judicial review? Some EU courts will not exclude illegally obtained evidence either, so challenging the warrant later on will be pointless.
Oh, and you might be in a reasonable EU country and still be hit with an EIO from one of the unreasonable countries. This is especially concerning given recent ECJ rulings increasingly directing courts in receiving nations to blindly defer to the requesting party when dealing with EAWs, EIOs and similar.
Worth considering when hosting in the EU.
>How comfortable are you guys with the fact that EU countries allow prosecutors and sometimes even police officers to issue their own search warrants without meaningful judicial review?
This is a hilarious 'just asking questions' concern that doesn't address the complete 180 in direction the US is taking and descending in to authoritarianism while moving against the world order it primarily helped build post WWII while threatening other liberal democracies like Canada and Denmark with invasions.
It's a complete false equivalence. ICE agents have straight up murdered two US citizens in broad daylight without consequence and you're querying the nature of some search warrants in the EU.
His comment did not even mention the US. Only critiquing the authoritarianism going on in the EU. One of the issues with modern politics is everyone wants to deflect.
I need to host my emails somewhere. This means that you can't reject the EU in isolation, you have to compare it to the alternatives. And the most prevalent alternative is the US
Now of course if somebody has a better alternative that's neither in the EU nor US (nor Russia, or China) that'd be interesting to hear about
20 replies →
The post is about moving stuff from US to EU, so it's not like the US is brought up out of nowhere.
The comment does not exist in a vacuum. It exists in a thread where the topic is, eminently, migrating away from US services to EU ones.
3 replies →
> critiquing the authoritarianism going on in the EU
What?
2 replies →
> the complete 180 in direction the US is taking and descending in to authoritarianism while moving against the world order
The EU is just one AfD win away from doing the same thing. It's not immune to this issue either, you have the same problem happening right under your noses.
Not really.
Most European countries have parliamentary democracies.
It's not a winner-takes-all system ala presidential and semi-presidential republics where effectively individuals:
1. rule without opposition. There's no opposition it's not represented in that branch.
2. rule without even needing support of their own parties. The Italian prime minister or the German chancellor have to fight every day in parliament to have support of their parties and the other parties coalitions.
3. a single individual can claim popular mandate. In parliamentary systems you vote for parties/coalitions, not individuals
There's a reason why this authoritarian trend goes from the Philippines, Nicaragua, to Belarus, to Turkey, to Russia, to most African countries and now US. They are all presidential republics.
The last parliamentary democracy to turn authoritarian has been...Sri Lanka. Almost 50 years ago. Presidential ones? It's basically every year.
Systems with winner-takes-all mechanics do not represent voters, and power is too concentrated.
Parliamentary democracies might be labeled as less efficient, that I can agree, but they have strong antibodies to such people.
See Austria or the Netherlands as examples where strong far right authoritarian-wannabes individuals became prime ministers...and then nothing happened and their governments didn't last.
2 replies →
Europeans are so blind to how they are essentially on the same path as the US, the US just got there first.
8 replies →
Lol what does ICE have to do with a local police officer being able to bully a tech worker into providing your private communications?
what example are you talking about? assuming it's non-UK would like to read about it.
> the complete 180 in direction the US is taking and descending in to authoritarianism
A similar (though currently a little bit less marked) trend can also be observed for the EU and EU countries.
AFAIK there's no murdering of citizens going on in any EU member country by the same countries government at the moment.
5 replies →
>(though currently a little bit less marked)
Again this is a false equivalence, 'a little less marked' isn't close to imparting the true state of things and to be honest a little disingenuous.
The EU is not in full motion to dismantle democracy across her 27 states. The US should it not turn this around in the midterms is finished as a liberal democracy.
So 'ah yes but Hungary' doesn't persuade me even though I'll concede it's a problem for the EU. If Tisza is elected in April, Hungary will be on course to turn things around. So you're comparing 1 out of 27 to 50 out of 50 states.
15 replies →
Trends are various. You had Poland remove rightwing goverment 2 years ago (yes and elect righwing president few months ago). Romania electing a European centric president.
We can go on. EU is not a single country, not a single community of people.
I'm not advertising the US here or trying to troll. I'm an European pointing out things about the European system that many here will not have thought about.
>It's a complete false equivalence. ICE agents have straight up murdered two US citizens in broad daylight without consequence and you're querying the nature of some search warrants in the EU.
Maybe keep your US nonsense to yourself?
I’m in the US and generally pretty level-headed. Nothing makes me become a red-blooded patriot nationalist temporarily faster than seeing Europeans completely ignore the similarities in our political ills. It always boils down to, “but it’s the good kind of authoritarianism we have that preserves social order!!!” as if that has never failed to produce desired results. Thanks for being much more rational. We have a concerning political trend here in the US, it can’t be denied, but the EU is following in step.
4 replies →
Just saying, the vast majority of services people are moving from would be US based given it is where all of big tech comes from. So comparing it to the US is relevant?
If you're trying to say the eu isn't a saint either, sure.
1 reply →
[dead]
[flagged]
What part of this are you disputing?
Is the commenter the "delusionally stupid" one or did you mean something else?
[flagged]
What a disingenuous comparison. The wiki article you've linked ("List of killings by law enforcement officers in Germany") sums to 552 people over the last 100 years. In contrast, the corresponding wiki article on the US ("Lists of killings by law enforcement officers in the United States" [1]) estimates more than 900 deaths per year. Indeed, the number of slayings is so great that the article does not tabulate the sum in a single table (as the German article does) but instead links to separate wiki articles with tabulated results by month.
---
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_killings_by_law_enfor...
10 replies →
> How comfortable are you guys with the fact that EU countries allow prosecutors and sometimes even police officers to issue their own search warrants without meaningful judicial review?
(IANAL.) This was reviewed by the courts themselves:
> The CJEU confirmed that the Belgian, French and Swedish prosecutors were sufficiently independent from the executive to be able to issue EAWs. […]
> […] Public prosecutors will qualify as an issuing judicial authority where two conditions are met: […]
> 2. Second, public prosecutors must be in a position to act in an independent way, specifically with respect to the executive. The CJEU requires that the independence of public prosecutors be organised by a statutory framework and organisational rules that prevent the risk of prosecutors being subject to individual instructions by the executive (as was the case with the German prosecutor). Moreover, the framework must enable prosecutors to assess the necessity and proportionality of issuing an EAW. In the French prosecutor judgment, the CJEU specifically indicated that:
* https://www.fairtrials.org/articles/legal-analysis/can-belgi...
The question that the OP asks is fair enough, but there's a lot of subtly and 'low-level' details on how things operate compared to the high-level question that is being asked. Also depends on where the OP lives and what he's used to: common law (UK/US/CA/etc) and civil law procedures and laws are (AIUI) quite different.
For anyone wondering:
EAW = European Arrest Warrant
EIO = European Investigative Order (basically lets different jurisdictions demand information from each other)
CJEU = Court of Justice of the EU (think of it as a supreme court)
Also IANAL: I Am Not A Lawyer. If you really want to guard yourself from a legal standpoint, write the full sentence. "IANAL" could mean anything.
That being said, I am not a lawyer, I am not a legal professional, this is not a legal advice.
Valid question, which must be put in the context of US-based providers willingly satisfying US out-of-jurisdiction search requests for EU data without even letting the EU know about it. (And when the providers are not willing, they can be forced by U.S. Cloud Act)
https://www.forbes.com/sites/emmawoollacott/2025/07/22/micro...
Sweden is a country like this. It is just the way it is here. It can be abused, sure. But all things considered, I much rather have my things hosted here than in the US.
Yeah, but you also have Hungary who can decide to do things the same way they're done in Sweden and Finland.
So don’t host your stuff in Hungary?
21 replies →
In Hungary, sure. But each country has its own jurisdiction.
7 replies →
> How comfortable are you guys with the fact that EU countries allow prosecutors and sometimes even police officers to issue their own search warrants without meaningful judicial review?
Just to be clear, according to the DOJ, law enforcement officials in the US can search your home without a warrant if they suspect that you are a "Alien Enemy" [1].
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25915967-doj-march-1...
Don't forget civil forfeiture, which can (an does) happen whether they think you're an enemy or not.
https://ij.org/issues/private-property/civil-forfeiture/freq...
Wouldn't source that this is happening in 1 of the member states be enough to raise alarms? Why do all of them need to for you to consider this an issue?
You are technically correct but seem to be applying common law standards to civil law countries.
Unlike common law judiciary, civil law judiciary in and of itself has investigatory powers and judges don’t just hear arguments but can order their own investigations and are significantly more independent than in common law.
This can cut both ways, yes in theory the judge can accept evidence the prosecution obtained illegally, but the judges can also call the prosecutions bluff and call their own witnesses or order an independent expert to provide their own opinion, even if defense is unable to.
You forgot about the Nordic countries.
Scandinavian law is commonly considered to be a subcategory of civil law. Judges in Scandinavia have investigative powers and can judge the truth of the matter.
2 replies →
At least there is still the rule of law and democracy in the EU
Is there really? Governments routinely go against the ECHR and the ECJ, and do nothing to rectify past violations when ruled against.
On a national level, sure.
Which cases are you talking about? Compliance with actual court rulings is pretty high.
2 replies →
Considering who we're comparing it to when discussing this topic: absolutely. Not even a question.
Anyone claiming otherwise is delusional at best.
7 replies →
The baseline level of freedom of speech in the EU, in particular, is much, much worse than in the US. We’re talking about a group of countries with active, enforced blasphemy laws! Completely unthinkable for Americans.
The US is at position 57 in the world free speech index. Virtually all EU countries do better and a bunch are top 10:
https://rsf.org/en/index
American exceptionalism doesn’t seem to know boundaries.
6 replies →
Given the last year, it doesn't seem like any level of suppression of freedom is in fact unthinkable for Americans.
I would argue that if protesters against Israels politics are persecuted, detained or even deported, the baseline of free speech has crumbled significantly.
Boiling down the different approaches to freedom of speech to "The baseline level is higher/lower", has always been a pretty simplistic (and if you would actually delve into the topic a little, flat out wrong) view .
Freedom of speech is not absolute. Neither in Europe nor in the US. Both effectively have rules restricting certain speech. For example, speech that may harm others, such as inciting violence or maybe the most famous example: "Shouting FIRE in a full venue".
European countries tend to spell out these restrictions more explicitly. It's completely reasonable to disagree with these restrictions. But the simple existence of them shouldn't lead you to the conclusion that one is "more freedom of speech" than the other.
And at last I want to add, that that is how it's been historically. Sadly, the recent developments in US show pretty well how freedom of speech cannot be measured by "How many specific laws are there about things I cannot say?".
6 replies →
> freedom of speech
Oh please. There's free speech without a free press (US ranks 57/190, behind Sierra Leone) people are just amplifying the same BS they heard from some ignorant influencer. I would argue even your idea of "active enforced blasphemy laws" shows that. That's worse than useless, that is detrimental to a society (case in point, the current president and his whole cabinet).
https://rsf.org/en/index
1 reply →
> We’re talking about a group of countries with active, enforced blasphemy laws
In a very narrow interpretation, yes. Everyone with a modicum of common sense would realise that countries with laws on the books against offending religions / inciting hatred against them are still more free than a country where the fucking Bible is cited in court rulings and political speeches, and where there are active laws prohibiting non-religious people from holding office.
One is for keeping the peace, the other is actively meddling religion and politics.
> baseline level of freedom of speech
Being unable to spout Nazi ideology is technically a restriction on freedom of speech, yes. But again, anyone with a modicum of common sense (and a bit of historical understanding) would understand this to be a good thing.
6 replies →
[flagged]
11 replies →
For now – the EU is one AfD win away from following in America's footsteps.
The EU governance system is vastly different than the US, and not nearly as fragile. Even if AfD gets sway in one country, it doesn't mean that suddenly they can do anything they want like you saw in the last US election.
My understanding of the EU system is that it's far more proportional in representation, and a simple 51% isn't enough to have 100% control. Parties still need to work together and compromise.
1 reply →
AfD is a party in single country in EU.
1 reply →
US legal protections do not apply to EU citizens keeping their data in the US, do they?
So what's the point of this comparison, since if I host my data in the US they don't need a warrant at all?
The geo-location of where you keep your data is irrelevant to US legal reach.
They don't, they don't even apply to EU citizens keeping their (our, in fact) data on our (EU's servers) if what we're doing happens to cross some interests of the US Government. I mean, there are some legal "protections" in place for that, but notice the quotes. Thinking otherwise is delusional, but, hey, people should be allowed to enjoy the liberty of their slightly larger iron bird-cage.
No system is perfect. It's more a theoretical risk for now, if you're not running a shady business.
The police will of course decide if you are running a shady business.
Nintendo may also decide this.
https://www.pcgamer.com/hardware/uk-games-collector-raided-b...
> What Is An Administrative Warrant?
> An administrative warrant is a legal document issued by a government agency, rather than a court, that authorizes the agency to take specific actions such as conducting inspections, searches, or seizing property. Unlike judicial warrants, administrative warrants are frequently issued on less than probable cause of a crime.
> Administrative warrants are typically used for regulatory or civil enforcement purposes and allow agencies to enforce rules and regulations within their jurisdiction, such as health inspections, building code enforcement, or immigration-related actions.
> The problem with administrative warrants is that they make the agency both the prosecutor and the judge in the very same matter. The entire point of having agencies go to court for a warrant is because courts are an independent branch with an independent mission. Rather than solely focusing on identifying and prosecuting violations of law, courts seek to check agency errors and overreach. When the very same agency that wants to execute a warrant is the one deciding whether it issues, those checks disappear, and Americans’ security pays the price.
https://ij.org/issues/ijs-project-on-the-4th-amendment/admin...
Without disagreeing at all, can you think of a major jurisdiction that's better? US I basically assume everything is searchable without a warrant, if not leaked on a ex-DOGE intern USB stick.
Who else is there with a major infra ecosystem? Russia? China? UK? Not sure these are better than EU. Japan seems quite inward looking.
This account is sockpuppeting. They are not participating on this site in good faith.
[flagged]
It’s why I don’t trust anyone. Sure, EU has better policies and regulations than the wild west (US/Canada), but they still can and will do monkey business when needed, and they are more twisted about it than the US. The best strategy is to host your own and encrypt all, if it’s too much effort for some services try to use one from a country that has no interest in you (outside the west for example).
I'd say don't let perfect be the enemy of good/better. Moving from US to EU is a move for the better. But EU isn't perfect, and there might be even better options available, but unless you have them, I'd recommend starting with the move to EU.
Do you seriously think that US requires warrants from US judges to spy on non-citizens abroad? That is 100% false. There is zero protection from the US govt for non-citizens living abroad.
How comfortable are you guys with the fact the US has just partnered with OpenAI to enable mass surveillance?
> you might be in a reasonable EU country and still be hit with an EIO from one of the unreasonable countries.
Are you certain this has happened? I never heard that happen in central Europe. I am pretty certain legislation of other countries is irrelevant, unless it would be an EU regulation - and I am unaware of an EU regulation that could bypass local laws and that has not been made a EU law. Which EU law specifically do you refer to?
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELE...
Not comfortable. But making choices in the real world is about choosing the best option, not the perfect option.
Generally comfortable.
While the EIO is s controversial instrument (I particularly dislike the excessive power it gives to authorities in issuing countries and the inability to question the warrant), it at least is something that happens as part of a judicial process.
I'm certainly more comfortable with it than being subject to the whims of the US government and its 3 letter agencies.
That said, yeah, EIO in the shape it exists is bad.
>it at least is something that happens as part of a judicial process
Only sort of, because some countries have very weird ideas of what a "judicial process" is.
>I'm certainly more comfortable with it than being subject to the whims of the US government and its 3 letter agencies.
That's fair, but I think it's a mistake. In the worst case the European system grants a village cop in another country the authority to conduct extremely intrusive surveillance on you.
Criminals can easily co-opt this system and steal your crypto or whatever, a far more realistic threat for most people than the NSA.
> That's fair, but I think it's a mistake
I obviously don't share the sentiment.
> village cop in another country the authority to conduct extremely intrusive surveillance on you.
> far more realistic threat for most people than the NSA.
If you think some policeman in a rural Frech village is a bigger threat to your freedom than NSA or other 3-letter agencies from the USA, we can all see who is mistaken in evaluating threats.
> Criminals can easily co-opt this system and steal your crypto or whatever
I don't want to say anything, I just wanted to highlight this bit because it made me giggle.
3 replies →
How much is this a practical rather than theoretical problem?
One of the problems with being on the US Internet is that we get lots of coverage of US police overreach and much less coverage of EU police overreach. That could have one of three causes:
- actual incidence is low
- it's not being reported
- it is being reported, but doesn't generate discourse
(And the counter option: sometimes when you do hear about it, it's been laundered through weird US right-wing politics, like almost anything anyone says about Sweden)
> That could have one of three causes:
> - actual incidence is low
> - it's not being reported
> - it is being reported, but doesn't generate discourse
Fourth possible cause:
- the EU has 24 official languages
i.e. when it is reported, the number of people who are actually capable of understanding the reporting is only a fraction and rather localized.
Well https://www.devever.net/~hl/xmpp-incident
It's a problem. But it has technical rather than political solutions.
[dead]
As long as you stay away from questionable behaviour, there is very little chance to encounter the police in the EU or having problems with your privacy. USA is different in that regard. Your existence can be a problem. Or monetary interests will risk your privacy to whoever wants to make money with you.
EU is not perfect, but saver than the USA in those matters (if you want to only invest a reasonable amount of effort and money), which is kinda the point here, isn't it?
EU is not a single uniform blob. There are neighbourhoods where you have to worry about being shot, and there are neighbourhoods where people leave their keys inside their cars.
So, with the police? YMMV.
Obviously, but we are talking about online-activity here, not randomly walking the streets. The normal sketchy cop on the streets will not be accessing your mailbox just because they don't like your skin. Attending certain events would trigger this more likely, but then you should also know how to protect yourself in those cases.
This isn't a downside against EU services when compared to the US, so what are you actually suggesting? Don't just vaguely hint at stuff. Should we be moving to Singaporean services? Oh shit, similar concerns there. Okay, where do you suggest we move? If you don't have any suggestions then there's little substance behind what you're saying.
>This isn't a point against EU services compared to the US
In the US the cops actually need a search warrant signed by a judge. In the EU they only sometimes need one.
>Should we be moving to Singaporean services? Oh shit, similar concerns there
Really? I've always been under the impression that it is courts who issue search warrants in Singapore, not the police or prosecutors.
Does ICE needs something?
3 replies →
A judge of a secret court, which are known to never deny any request?
11 replies →
Sounds terrible. Guess we should all just accept the worst of the worst and shut up?
Maybe the motivation is more to stop giving American big tech MAGA fascists money rather than any kind of gain in privacy/security against state level law enforcement.
Whataboutyism much?
[flagged]
> Some EU courts will not exclude illegally obtained evidence either, so challenging the warrant later on will be pointless.
Generally speaking, I trust EU countries criminal systems more then USA one. USA one is too procedure oriented - like for example with this rule.
Unlike in USA, in general European cops and prosecutors can be punished when they do illegal stuff. That provides better protection then the pretend fairness rule you just cited.
>Generally speaking, I trust EU countries criminal systems more then USA one. USA one is too procedure oriented - like for example with this rule.
Those procedures are written in blood
They are not and also dont do much to protect you. Untouchable cops due to qualified immunity and presumption of reguparity and simple fact that there is no remedy if they break your rights make this entirely moot.
Just now, like today, a decision was made that cops who literally made up a gang to go after innocent people ... wont be investigated.
Pretending you found proofs legally when you did not is easy. Especially when you are untouchable. And the rule does absolutely nothing to protect innocent people. It is just trying to make up for one injustice by creating another smaller one.