307. The European Court took into account the 2013 report issued by the then UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, who stated the following: Communications techniques and technologies have evolved significantly, changing the way in which communications surveillance is conducted by States. States must therefore update their understandings and regulation of communications surveillance and modify their practices in order to ensure that individuals’ human rights are respected and protected (…) Without adequate legislation and legal standards to ensure the privacy, security, and anonymity of communications, journalists, human rights defenders, and whistleblowers, for example, cannot be assured that their communications will not be subject to States’ scrutiny.557 308. With respect to surveillance of communications, the then Rapporteur added the following: Communications surveillance should be regarded as a highly intrusive act that potentially interferes with the rights to freedom of expression and privacy and threatens the foundations of a democratic society. Legislation must stipulate that State surveillance of communications must only occur under the most exceptional circumstances and exclusively under the supervision of an independent judicial authority. Safeguards must be articulated in law relating to the nature, scope and duration of the possible measures, the grounds required for ordering them, the authorities competent to authorize, carry out and supervise them, and the kind of remedy provided by the national law. (…) States should criminalize illegal surveillance by public or private actors. Such laws must not be used to target whistleblowers or other individuals seeking to expose human rights violations, nor should they hamper the legitimate oversight of government action by citizens.558 309. Furthermore, the European Court underscored the importance of examining in the specific case whether the intelligence activities were aimed at a particular group of persons, such as, for example, civil society organizations that might be critical of the government of a State.559 310. In the 2013 Report on Freedom of Expression and Internet, the IACHR and its Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression indicated the following on the effects on the rights to privacy and freedom of expression through the interception of private communications: 148. The interception and retention of data on private communications entails both a direct limitation on the right to privacy and an infringement of the right to freedom of thought and expression.560(…) 149. With respect to the right to privacy, the resolution “The Right to Privacy in the Digital Age.” adopted on December 18, 2013 by the General Assembly of the United Nations.561 This document underscores the value of the right to privacy in communications and expresses concern at the negative impact the surveillance of communications may have on the exercise UN, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Frank La Rue, 17 April 2013. Available at: https://www.refworld.org/docid/51a5ca5f4.html 558 UN, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Frank La Rue, 17 April 2013. Available at: https://www.refworld.org/docid/51a5ca5f4.html 559 ECHR, Szabó and Vissy v. Hungary, Judgment of 6 June 2016, paragraphs 36-37. 560 United Nations. General Assembly. Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Frank La Rue. A/HRC/23/40. April 17, 2013. Para. 81. Available for consultation at: http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/dpage_e.aspx?m=85 561 United Nations. General Assembly. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on December 18, 2013. 68/167. The right to privacy in the digital age. A/RES/68/167. January 21, 2014. Available for consultation at: http://www.un.org/Depts/dhl/resguide/r68_en.shtml; General Assembly. Department of Public Information. General Assembly Adopts 68 Resolutions, 7 Decisions as It Takes Action on Reports of Its Third Committee. 557 58