Brussels, 15/07/2015(Agence Europe) - “A dark day for fundamental rights in Europe”. It was in these very strong terms that the German rapporteur at the European Parliament on personal data protection, Jan-Philipp Albrecht (Greens/ EFA), described the adoption of the draft directive introducing a European Passenger Name Record (PNR) system by the European Parliament's civil liberties committee (LIBE). This draft had previously been thrown out by the LIBE committee in April 2013. It will allow EU airline companies to collect airline passenger data and to transfer it to the law enforcement agencies as a means to combat terrorism and organised crime.
MEPs in the LIBE committee have effectively granted a mandate (by 36 votes in favour, 14 against, with 8 abstentions) to Timothy Kirkhope (ECR, UK) to begin negotiations with the Council. Albrecht considers that this vote characterises a victory for mass surveillance measures in Europe. The vote, nonetheless, was hailed by the ECR and EPP as a means of strengthening European citizens' security and reducing the threat of terrorism.
The rapporteur also believes that this vote will provide a little coherence in the respective member states, at least 16 of which have already begun to implement their own PNR systems. According to the rapporteur, this coexistence of national systems creates a level of data protection disparity. PNR data have already proved useful in capturing “murderers, paedophiles and rapists; 95% of drug busts in Belgium and 85% in Sweden have been carried out thanks to PNR data”. These arguments are still contested by the ALDE and Greens/EFA groups.
No intra-European flights. The British MEP, however, had to backtrack on a number of points: the text adopted therefore does not include intra-European flights that would enable the targeting of sensitive destinations in the EU. The EPP believes that by limiting measures just to international flights to and from the EU, the text is less ambitious. On the other hand, travel agencies are also now covered by the mechanism and will have to transfer their reservation data for these international flights to the authorities.
This consideration was supposed to provide a level of reassurance to opponents of PNR: the compromise stipulates that sensitive data will be removed after 30 days and that all other data will be “concealed”. These data could therefore be kept up to 5 years (the EPP group proposed seven years) for terrorist crimes and up to 4 years for other crimes covered by the system. Only the authorities that are qualified and authorised to do so will have access to the data. After these five years are up, the data will have to be permanently erased, except if expressly required for a specific investigation.
Nonetheless, as suggested by the rapporteur, MEPs have agreed to expand the list of crimes (21 types of offence), covering, in addition to terrorism, the trafficking of human beings, drug trafficking, child pornography, arms trafficking, cybercrime and money-laundering. MEPs have made the sharing of this information between member states and Europol compulsory, in the absence of a centralised European filing system. Member states will therefore have to exchange the information collected.
On the question of personal data protection, MEPs highlighted the fact that the processing of PNR data should only apply for limited purposes, such as the identification of passengers that could possibly be involved in these crimes and where a more extended investigation is needed. PNR data processing units should have responsibility for data protection in an effort to verify application of the rules, with regard to retention, for example, and create a contact point in the event of complaints from users. PNR data collected will not be allowed to be transferred to private entities.
Transfer to third countries. These safeguards did not convince Sophie in't Veld from the ALDE group, who believed that the compromise remained too weak on the question of proportionality and necessity. The Socialists, particularly those from France, were divided on the subject. Certain French members were particularly disconcerted by the fact that PNR data transfers to countries outside the EU would be possible on a case-by-case basis. They also regretted the scope of the measure. The EPP criticised the S&D on which it was counting. According to one source from the EPP, the ALDE group also kept up the suspense until the moment of voting. In the end, only in't Veld voted against the report, said a member from the group. The compromise amendments were all adopted and the vote ultimately lasted much less time than the two hours initially planned.
Kirkhope said that he regarded those who did not vote for it as a bit short sighted and pointed to the coexistence of the different systems and the fact that they now at least had a mechanism that could be used against terrorism. He also said that he hoped to begin the trilogue meetings with the Council and Commission in September. (Solenn Paulic)