SoylentNews

canopic jug [soylentnews.org] writes:

Mullvad has published an update: The Swedish authorities answered their protocol request but without providing any information [mullvad.net]. The Swedish authorities based their refusal on claims of national security due to carrying out the raid at the behest of Germany. Mullvad quotes the specific laws which even show that they were raided in error.

Electronic Communications Act (2022:482) (LEK) Does not apply to Mullvad VPN AB

According to LEK’s definitions, LEK does not apply to Mullvad since we, as a VPN service provider are not regarded as an electronic communications network nor an electronic communications service.

Act (2012:278) on Collection of Data in Electronic Communication in the Crime Combating Authorities’ Intelligence Service (IHL)

This law can only be used to request user data from businesses having the LEK reporting obligation. This means authorities cannot use LEK nor IHL to request information from Mullvad.

The Swedish Code of Judicial Procedure (1942:740) (RB)

According to this, a search of premises may be instigated not just on the individual who is suspected on reasonable grounds but on anyone, provided that there is a factual circumstance and that it can be tangibly demonstrated that there is a reasonable expectation of finding items subject to seizure, or other evidence of the offense in question. Objects may also be seized if they are believed to have importance for the investigation.

According to one of the relevant laws, the government can only grant the police permission to search the premises if it can be tangibly demonstrated that there is a reasonable expectation of finding items subject to seizure. Given that Mullvad neither collects that information nor is required to collect that information, there was no basis for the raid except, I conjecture, for possible harassment.

Furthermore the Swedish authorities seem to have lost Mullvad's earlier inquiry.

Original Submission