It clearly states here in 2 “consent of the person concerned OR some other legitimate basis laid down the law”, any random law will trump personal consent

I feel we need something much more strongly worded to protect our mail, paper or electronic, messages and other communications from being read, not just “respect”.

Let's parse this a little.

Article 7 codifies "respect for [one's] private life" and "respect for [one's] private communications". Well, "respect" is a vague notion. This does not clearly imply that the government is not allowed to read your communications, or otherwise spy on you, if it believes it has good reason. It will do so "respectfully", or supposedly minimize the intrusion etc.

As for article 8: Here it is "protection of personal data" and "fair processing". It does not say "protection from government access"; and "processing" is when the government or some other party already has your data. In fact, as others point out, even this wording has an explicit legitimization of violation of privacy and 'protection' whenever there is a law which defines something as "legitimate basis" for invading your privacy.

You would have liked to see wording like:

* "Privacy in one's home, personal life, communications and digital interactions is a fundamental right."

* "The EU, its members, its bodies, its officers and whoever acts on its behalf shall not invade individuals' privacy."

and probably something about a non-absolute right to anonymity. Codified exceptions should be limited and not open-ended.

You know that those pieces of paper mean nothing.