Comparative Legal Analysis of Judicial Oversight over Operational-Search Activities

Abstract

This article presents a comparative legal analysis of judicial oversight over operational-search activities (OSA) in various legal systems, with a focus on continental Europe, the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), and selected Asian jurisdictions. It highlights the central role of judicial authorization in protecting fundamental rights, particularly the right to privacy, when law enforcement agencies engage in covert surveillance and other special investigative measures. The study examines relevant legislative frameworks, judicial practices, and the influence of the European Court of Human Rights in shaping standards of oversight. It explores practices in countries such as France, Germany, Ukraine, Russia, Kazakhstan, Vietnam, Moldova, and Azerbaijan, assessing both the strengths and shortcomings of their respective models. The analysis reveals a global trend toward embedding OSA within the criminal process and ensuring judicial supervision, yet also uncovers persistent legal gaps, lack of transparency, and systemic approval of surveillance measures with minimal judicial scrutiny. The article concludes by emphasizing the need for clear procedural rules, effective remedies, and constitutional safeguards to ensure that operational-search measures do not infringe upon fundamental rights.