E.U. data protection in police and judicial cooperation matters:
Rights of suspects and defendants under attack by law enforcement demands
The 18-page analysis is on: http://www.statewatch.org/news/2006/oct/eu-dp.pdf
This is backed up by full-text documentation on Statewatch's Observatory on data protection in the E.U.: http://www.statewatch.org/eu-dp.htm
Tony Bunyan, Statewatch editor who prepared this analysis, comments:
"This is going to be a momentous decision affecting existing national laws on data protection, and the exchange of data within the EU and around the globe. It is also going to the the foundation of the right of data protection in a host of planned and future EU measures, including the new Schengen Information System (SIS II).
"The Commission draft proposal is being substantially re-written by the Council's Multidisciplinary Group on Organised Crime including removing the rights of data subjects and obstacles to the passing of data to third countries outside the EU.
"Until the Council finishes its so-called "second reading" the final text will not been known - when they are intending to simply "nod" it through. If it does so without the opportunity for national and European parliaments and civil society to express their views it will utterly lack legitimacy”
Inquiries to: 00 44 208 802 1882 or e-mail: office@statewatch.org
The main conclusion are:
* the Council is removing data protection for the individual to effect the “principle of availability” (ie: that data held by one agency must be accessible to all other agencies in the EU) and seeking to ensure that nothing stands in the way of direct/automated access to data by the law enforcement agencies
* the Commission proposal is being fundamentally re-drafted by a Council working party representing the interests of the law enforcement agencies
* the European Parliament is only being “consulted” and has already given its opinion, now there is nothing to stop the Council re-writing the measure and nodding it through – unless the parliament insists on being re-consulted
* No principle to be established on the right of access to data held on data subjects because "in almost all cases" it would not be supplied "because of the exceptions"
* no national data protection law may “restrict or prohibit” the exchange of personal data with agencies in other E.U. states
* "national security matters" (internal security agencies) to be exempt from control
* admission that the main 1995 Directive ("first pillar") does not work properly in the transfer of personal data to third countries
* no obligation to correct errors or mistakes in data passed to EU states or third countries
* data to be passed to agencies in non-EU states whether they have adequate data protection laws or not under existing bilateral agreements
* to amend EU-USA agreements to meet the data protection standards would "adversely affect the EU's credibility"
Statewatch; Monitoring the State and Civil Liberties in Europe http://www.statewatch.org
Rights of suspects and defendants under attack by law enforcement demands
The 18-page analysis is on: http://www.statewatch.org/news/2006/oct/eu-dp.pdf
This is backed up by full-text documentation on Statewatch's Observatory on data protection in the E.U.: http://www.statewatch.org/eu-dp.htm
Tony Bunyan, Statewatch editor who prepared this analysis, comments:
"This is going to be a momentous decision affecting existing national laws on data protection, and the exchange of data within the EU and around the globe. It is also going to the the foundation of the right of data protection in a host of planned and future EU measures, including the new Schengen Information System (SIS II).
"The Commission draft proposal is being substantially re-written by the Council's Multidisciplinary Group on Organised Crime including removing the rights of data subjects and obstacles to the passing of data to third countries outside the EU.
"Until the Council finishes its so-called "second reading" the final text will not been known - when they are intending to simply "nod" it through. If it does so without the opportunity for national and European parliaments and civil society to express their views it will utterly lack legitimacy”
Inquiries to: 00 44 208 802 1882 or e-mail: office@statewatch.org
The main conclusion are:
* the Council is removing data protection for the individual to effect the “principle of availability” (ie: that data held by one agency must be accessible to all other agencies in the EU) and seeking to ensure that nothing stands in the way of direct/automated access to data by the law enforcement agencies
* the Commission proposal is being fundamentally re-drafted by a Council working party representing the interests of the law enforcement agencies
* the European Parliament is only being “consulted” and has already given its opinion, now there is nothing to stop the Council re-writing the measure and nodding it through – unless the parliament insists on being re-consulted
* No principle to be established on the right of access to data held on data subjects because "in almost all cases" it would not be supplied "because of the exceptions"
* no national data protection law may “restrict or prohibit” the exchange of personal data with agencies in other E.U. states
* "national security matters" (internal security agencies) to be exempt from control
* admission that the main 1995 Directive ("first pillar") does not work properly in the transfer of personal data to third countries
* no obligation to correct errors or mistakes in data passed to EU states or third countries
* data to be passed to agencies in non-EU states whether they have adequate data protection laws or not under existing bilateral agreements
* to amend EU-USA agreements to meet the data protection standards would "adversely affect the EU's credibility"
Statewatch; Monitoring the State and Civil Liberties in Europe http://www.statewatch.org