Kohus ei rahuldanud Humala kaebust kapo vastu

Kohus ei rahuldanud Humala kaebust kapo vastu

EN

Court did not satisfy Humal's complaint against Kapo

Priit Humal tahtis teada, kas on tema suhtes teinud . Ta küsis kapolt selle kohta teavet. Kapo ütles, et .
Tartu halduskohus otsustas, et Humala väide ei ole õige. Kohus leidis, et teave, mida Humal viitas, võis tulla mõne teise inimese kohta tehtud toimingust.
Kohus selgitas, et kui , siis kehtib . Kapo vastus oli selle seadusega kooskõlas. Kohus ütles, et inimesele antakse ainult siis, kui see ei ole enam saladus.
Humal oli üllatunud, et . Ta küsis, mida kapo tegi ja kas need väited on tõesed. Kapo pressiesindaja ütles, et nad ei saa rääkida varjatud toimingutest, kui need on .
Õigusteadlane Jaan Ginter ütles, et kapo peaks tegelema ainult riigi julgeolekuga seotud asjadega. Kuid , mis tema arvates ei ole õiged. Näiteks kapo võib , isegi kui need ei ohusta riiki.
Kohtu otsus ei ole veel lõplik. Priit Humal kavatseb .
Priit Humal wanted to know whether the Security Police (Kapo) had conducted covert operations against him. He requested information from Kapo about this. Kapo stated that they could neither confirm nor deny it.
The Tartu Administrative Court ruled that Humal's claim was not correct. The court found that the information Humal referred to could have come from an operation conducted against someone else.
The court explained that when a security agency processes personal data, a special law (JAS) applies. Kapo's response was in accordance with this law. The court stated that information about covert operations is only disclosed to individuals when it is no longer classified.
Humal was surprised that Kapo's activities cannot be monitored. He asked what Kapo had done and whether these claims were true. A Kapo spokesperson said they cannot discuss covert operations if they are state secrets.
Legal expert Jaan Ginter said that Kapo should only deal with matters related to national security. However, Kapo has more authority, which in his opinion is not justified. For example, Kapo can investigate corruption cases even if they do not threaten the state.
The court's decision is not yet final. Priit Humal intends to continue appealing.