Communication data is used not only for investigating crimes but also for ensuring security. Therefore, laws are needed that allow this data to be retained longer.
Reimo Sildvee asks why the collection of communication data is now a topic again. Taavi Pern explains that courts have said that data collected for business purposes can be used. But data collected by government order cannot be used in court.
Keilin Tammepärg from ITL says that their union has been discussing the topic of communication data retention for years. ITL believes that the law applies and data can be used for investigating crimes.
Taavi Pern explains that the prosecutor's office uses communication data collected for business purposes. For example, call times and locations. But the state cannot force telecom companies to collect specific data.
Keilin Tammepärg says that telecom companies retain customer names and service usage times. For example, for billing disputes. But the problem is broader because data is also used in other institutions.
Taavi Pern explains that communication data shows where and when a call took place. But the exact location is not visible. For example, a call may go through the Pirita mast even if the caller is in Tallinn.
For SMS, the sending time and location are retained, but not the content. Data is not collected for Messenger, FaceTime, or WhatsApp calls.
Keilin Tammepärg says that data retention is an additional burden for telecom companies. Currently, data is retained for one year.
Taavi Pern says that the biggest dispute is whether the state can force telecom companies to retain data. Belgium has good solutions for this, such as regional marking.
Keilin Tammepärg thinks that a regional solution is not feasible in Estonia because criminals move. It is important to consider security threats.
Taavi Pern says that communication data is used to ensure security. Therefore, there must be a law that allows this data to be retained longer than a few months.
Taavi Pern believes that the collection of communication data should be better regulated. For example, the Chancellor of Justice could oversee how data is collected.
Keilin Tammepärg says it is important to discuss what data is collected and who has access to it. The state must decide how to ensure security and the possibility of investigations.