Rights has in some cases taken the approach that a violation of the right to privacy through unlawful methods of obtaining evidence can be established separately without necessarily rendering the trial as a whole as unfair, the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights while countering terrorism has expressed the view “that States and in particular their judicial organs, need to remain vigilant in upholding the position that the use of evidence obtained in breach of human rights or of domestic law renders a trial unfair.” 378 254. More generally, as regards the use of personal information gathered and held on computers, databases or other devices, whether by public authorities or private individuals, the UN Human Rights Committee has stressed that states have to take effective measures to ensure that such information does not reach the hands of persons who are not authorized by law to receive, process and use it, and that it is never used for purposes incompatible with the Covenant.379 Human rights defenders should be protected from any disclosure of personal data or information to the mass media, in particular if it concerns sensitive or intimate information that may be used to discredit the individual concerned or damage their honour or reputation. The ECtHR has held, for example, that disclosure of sensitive CCTV material to the mass media for broadcast use – without the consent of the individual concerned or without masking their identity – can be a serious interference with the right to respect for private life.380 The Court has also found that the protection of personal data, not least medical data, was of fundamental importance, and that making it accessible to the public could dramatically affect the individual’s private and family life in violation of Article 8 of the ECHR.381 255. Furthermore, personal data and information should only be kept as long as justi- fiable and strictly necessary. The Council of Europe Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data, for example, stipulates that “[p]ersonal data undergoing automatic processing shall be […] preserved in a form which permits identification of the data subjects for no longer than is required for the purpose for which those data are stored.”382 In accordance with the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, authorities also have a positive obligation to provide individuals with an effective and accessible proce378  See “Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism”, UN Doc. A/63/223, 6 August 2008, para. 34. Also, in relation to criminal cases, the UN Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors, for example, state that when prosecutors come into possession of evidence against suspects that they know or believe was obtained through recourse to unlawful methods, which constitute a grave violation of the suspect’s human rights, they shall refuse to use such evidence against the suspects. See “Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors, adopted by the Eighth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders”, Havana, Cuba, 27 August to 7 September 1990, para. 16. 379  See General Comment No. 16, para. 10. 380  See Peck v. the United Kingdom, Application no. 44647/98, 28 January 2003. In the case concerned this was notwithstanding the fact that the footage was recorded in a public place. 381  See Z v. Finland, Application no. 22009/93, 25 February 1997. 382  See Council of Europe, “Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data”, Article 5. 118 Guidelines on the Protection of Human Rights Defenders