European Parliament debates EU-US data protection agreement

Europeans and Americans are trying to overcome their data protection differences via a possible police and judicial co-operation agreement. At a Civil Liberties Committee hearing on Monday, MEPs debated a draft negotiating brief proposed by the Commission to the Council. The EU’s Belgian Presidency would like the negotiating brief to be approved in December, said current President of the Council Stefaan De Clerck.  (Video here.)

The most important statement at the meeting came from US ambassador William Kennard who said that US Congress cannot reopen debate on the Privacy Act.

The agreement as envisaged by the Commission “will guarantee a certain number of basic rights for those whose data is gathered” to enable them to take legal action, in Europe or the USA, against abuses of these rights, explained Ms Le Bail. “A key issue is recognition – or otherwise – that European citizens possess the same rights as Americans under the Privacy Act. And only Congress can change that”, observed Rui Tavares (GUE/NGL, PT).

“I don’t think that Congress can reopen debate on the Privacy Act. The Obama Adminstration does not want this, and personal view is that it won’t happen”, replied Mr Kennard. Many other legal remedies could be used to solve the problem, he added.

The Washington Post says that

Europe’s objections, based on privacy considerations, worry U.S.
counterterrorism officials because computer scrutiny of passenger lists
has become an increasingly important tool in the struggle to prevent
terrorists from entering the United States or traveling to and from
their havens. The would-be Times Square bomber was hauled off a
Dubai-bound airliner in May, a senior U.S. counterterrorism official
said, after his name on the manifest produced a ding in Department of
Homeland Security computers.

Kennard said that the United States would oppose any attempt to make the
new agreement invalidate the dozens of agreements, most of them secret,
that the United States has concluded with individual European
governments. But several European Parliament members said that leaving
those accords intact would make no sense if they violate the
pan-European agreement, insisting they would have to be updated.


4 Responses

  1. Thank you for posting this, and thank you for the link to the Post article.

    I am interested in the meaning of “Many other legal remedies [that] could be used to solve the problem”…
    and the growing gap btw what the different sides mean for “solving the problems”.

  2. Very good question R; I’d be interested to know as well. I think we’re slowly heading for a veto in the EP..

  3. Trade sanctions against the US are an option to deal with the use of double standards, the discriminatory protection of data in the US. That is clearly unacceptable, it has to stop. Among the option is blocking of certain US-run online services which collect user data from Europeans.

  4. The U.S. are simply interested in european data. And they found a weak spot in Europe to give them what they want. Commissioner Malmstrom is her name. And she is willing to do anything to pass data on to America. Anything goes to get a second mandate.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: