In order to minimise such consequences there must be a measure of legal protection in domestic law against arbitrary interference by public authorities with the right to correspondence. The law must be sufficiently clear in its terms to provide to citizens protection and give them an adequate indication as to the circumstances in which and the conditions on which public authorities are empowered to resort to this secret and potentially dangerous interference with the right to respect for private life and correspondence. If the law does not indicate with reasonable clarity the scope and manner of exercise of the relevant discretion conferred on the public authorities, the minimum degree of legal protection to which citizens are entitled under the rule of law in a democratic society is lacking. In other words the interference has to be lawful i.e. in any case in accordance with the law . In the opinion of the European Human Rights Court some power of interception are permissible to prevent espionage and terrorism and other crimes of this kind.
Different countries have different systems of legal provisions on interception of communications.
Some countries such as Germany or United Kingdom have approved special acts on interception of communications. Other countries, as France, have separate provisions spread out in different codes, laws or other legal acts to protect the right to correspondence. The same system is adopted by our country but, one can easily identify that the Albanian legislation lacks sufficient and detailed provisions. The overall international practice helped to draw the conclusion that a special law on interception of Communications is needed not only by Civil Law countries but also by Common Law countries as United Kingdom has it from 1985. The special domestic law on interception of communication has to be applied to the interception of all forms of communications, whatsoever their nature.