20 Human Rights in Counter-Terrorism Investigations 1.1 Information and Intelligence-gathering It is extremely important that intelligence systems – whether they are computerized or paper-based systems – are kept to a manageable size. This both makes them practical and facilitates their human rights compliance. Experience teaches that law enforcement personnel involved in maintaining intelligence systems tend to accumulate information over time, including information that at first sight may appear to be inconsequential or irrelevant and out of date. They assume that one day the information might become useful. However, almost always it results in the system becoming nothing more than a warehouse that gets increasingly full, filled with out-of-context information and, thus, increasingly unmanageable. Even computerized systems, which are easier to search and manage than paper-based systems, become ineffective and of little use to operational police officers. The fact that a piece of information just might be useful one day does not justify keeping thousands of pieces of such information indefinitely. The most modern and effective intelligence systems work on the principle • Right to a fair trial; 24 that “less is more”. A lean system stores only relevant information that has • Respect for private and family life; 25 been properly evaluated and that is regularly weeded. It will be of far more • Freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief; 26 use in supporting police operations than one that absorbs everything, keeps • Freedom of expression; and 27 it indefinitely and produces nothing. Storing information about crime and • Freedom of association and the right of peaceful assembly. 28 criminal suspects is not an end in itself. 24 OSCE Vienna and Copenhagen Documents, op. cit. note 21; ICCPR, Article 14; ECHR, Article 6; CFREU, Article 47; and ADRDM, Article 18. 25 OSCE Moscow Document, op. cit. note 21; ICCPR, Article 17; ECHR, Article 8; CFREU, Article 7; and ADRDM, Articles 5, 9 and 10. 26 OSCE Helsinki Document, op. cit. note 22; OSCE Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe, Concluding Document, “Questions Relating to Security in Europe: Principles”, Madrid, 6 September 1983, <http://www.osce.org/mc/40871>; OSCE Vienna and Copenhagen Documents, op. cit. note 21; OSCE Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe, Decision No. VIII, “The Human Dimension”, Budapest, 5-6 December 1994, <http://www.osce.org/mc/39554?download=true>; OSCE Ministerial Council, Decision No. 4/03, “Tolerance and Non-discrimination”, Maastricht, 2 December 2003, < http://www.osce.org/mc/19382>; ICCPR, Article 18; ECHR, Article 9; CFREU, Article 10; and ADRDM, Article 3. 27 OSCE Copenhagen Document, op. cit. note 21; OSCE Budapest Document, op. cit. note 26; ICCPR, Article 19; ECHR, Article 10; CFREU, Article 11; and ADRDM, Article 4. 28 OSCE Copenhagen Document, op. cit. note 21; OSCE Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe, “A New Era of Democracy, Peace and Unity”, Paris, 21 November 1990, <http://www.osce.org/mc/39516>; OSCE Helsinki Document, op. cit. note 20; ICCPR, Articles 21 and 22; ECHR, Article 11; CFREU, Article 12; and ADRDM, Articles 21 and 22.