This is the end of the legal uncertainty for companies concerned since the invalidation by the European Court of Safe Harbor! At least that is the message that tries to pass the Commission through the adoption of Privacy Shield or protective shield.
From the beginning, the executive plays optimism, including ensuring that the decision of the Cuje merely legitimize its work renegotiation of an agreement with the United States. The talks, however, dated back to 2013 and appeared not then move on.
Safe Harbor Private, US and EU have obviously agreed virtues of haste. But the Privacy Shield it fully meets the shortcomings identified by the judges of the European Court? No doubt lawyers will examine the text and particularly on the guarantees provided by the US authorities.
Transfers “optimal conditions”. But sufficient in law?
Meanwhile, the EU executive wants serene. The new system is a “solid” and providing “enhanced standards for data protection”. But above all, these standards are “accompanied by more stringent controls” and “guarantees regarding access to government data.”
Finally, the Privacy Shield defines “simplified possibilities of redress for individuals in case of complaint.” The European Commission has re-read the judgment of the Cuje and check in a statement the reasons that have earned the Safe Harbor its invalidation.
“The data flow between our two continents are essential to our society and our economy. We now have a solid framework to ensure that such transfers take place under optimal conditions, including the security plan “trusts Andrus Ansip, the Vice President of the Commission.
the economic interests are preserved. In he same rights of citizens? It’s to do. All uncertainties have not disappeared, although the Commission claims to have taken into account the opinion of the G29 to draft the final version of the Shield. Protection authorities have yet to confirm. They will vote on 25 July.
But Article 29 could be much less packed than the Commission, particularly regarding access for US authorities to European data. For the executive, this access is “subject to clear conditions and transparency obligations.”
Insurance of the United States, but not enshrined in law
Even better, the United States provided “insurance” that this access “would be subject to limitations, conditions and well-defined monitoring mechanisms”. Except as underlined our colleague Rue89, these commitments have not been translated into US law.
“It’s true that it would be better to have a law” agreed before the MEPs Commissioner věra jourová. Yet this is not a detail. In a statement, the CNIL said that the G29 had just “lamented that US authorities have not provided sufficiently precise information to rule out a massive and indiscriminate surveillance data of European citizens.”
However, the text of the Privacy Shield does not exclude any mass surveillance. The United States undertake to targeted collection through the use of “discriminatory”. But technical or operational reasons could stand in the way
The promise is this:. If the intelligence community can not use identifiers specific to a targeted collection, it will seek to reduce it “as much as possible.”
Privacy Shield does not dispel all the uncertainty. But the new agreement has, on paper, at least one advantage over the Safe Harbor: a joint annual review mechanism. Operation Shield will be controlled, “including fulfillment of the commitments and assurances regarding access to data for purposes of public order and national security.”
It will be theoretically possible to rewrite the text later. Critics on the Safe Harbor however, have taken years to be heard, and then only after a court decision. Critics of the new device they expect a new and Edward Snowden revelations about the massive collection of US data before committing appeal to the Cuje? Maybe not.
No comments:
Post a Comment