Brussels, 16/09/2015 (Agence Europe) - On Tuesday 15 September, the European Parliament's civil liberties committee gave a cautious welcome to the recent finalising of the talks on a transatlantic data protection agreement.
The agreement stipulates in 29 articles the data protection standards that will apply to transatlantic penal instruments (trade is covered by the 'Safe Harbour' system, see EUROPE 11385). In negotiation since 2011 and initialled in Luxembourg on 8 September, it now requires endorsement from the European Parliament.
During a public presentation (no longer following its earlier policy of keeping everything behind closed doors), the European Commission gave an overview of the agreement on Tuesday which the chief negotiator said would improve personal data protection for all transatlantic agreements, such as the PNR on the transfer of personal details of air travellers or the TFTP deal on bank information. It will also apply to future agreements (see EUROPE 11360).
The new rules cover both the duration of data retention, the reason why information is kept and how people in Europe can appeal against their information being held and fill gaps in past agreements because they are retroactive and should increase protection for personal information in any future agreements, argued the negotiator-in-chief.
She said there would be a transatlantic safeguard system and a safety net for future agreements which will not be allowed to have less data protection than set out in this agreement. The new agreement does not give any detailed information about how long information can be retained, aiming instead to lay down principles to guide any future talks.
The EU negotiator said great progress had been made because Europeans living in the EU will now be able to appeal to courts in the US. This innovation is contained in the 'Judicial Redress Act' that the US Congress is due to adopt and it is only when it is adopted that the data protection agreement can be deemed formally signed.
The negotiator explained the connection between the data protection agreement and the current reform of EU data protection rules (trialogue talks have begun on a regulation and broad agreement at the Council on exchange of information in the legal and police systems will be on the agenda of the JHA Council meeting on 9 October). With this new data protection agreement, the supply of information to countries outside the EU on police and justice matters will only be possible if there are appropriate, biding safeguards, such as those set out in international agreements.
MEPs want a legal opinion
The Commission explained that the negotiations had dragged on at the end because of a language question. The EU has 23 official languages and the US was concerned about the time and cost of negotiating 23 different official versions of the agreement. It was finally decided to sign the agreement in English, which will be the only version that legally applies in the US. This English version will then be translated by the European Commission into the other EU language versions so that people will be able to choose the language of the agreement in the event of a dispute.
The Commission's broad description was given a relatively warm welcome by EP rapporteur Jan Philipp Albrecht (Greens/EFA, Germany), who explained that the EP's main demands had been addressed. MEPs did not receive the initialled version until the night of Monday 14 to Tuesday 15 September, regretted Sophie in 't Veld (ALDE, the Netherlands). Albrecht said the agreement seems to be a considerable improvement, but this does not prejudge the EP's position at the end of the process. Albrecht asked for the EP's legal department to be sent the agreement and to comment on it. This request was sent to the chair of the EP's committee, without the support of the EPP.
Albrecht said several questions arise, whether, for example, the new agreement will require renegotiating existing legislation. No, answered the Commission's negotiator later on. Are there more pros than cons in the agreement? The MEPs also have questions about the law that will apply to non-Europeans living in the EU. The EPP says it is the rights in Venezuela, for example, that should apply to Venezuelans living in the EU. The Commission mentions using both the law of the country of origin of a non-EU passport holder living in the EU and the EU rules.
Fully backing the call for a legal opinion, Sophie in 't'Veld said that the agreement seemed to provide much less protection than the currently negotiated data protection legislation. She said she was not reassured in the slightest and wanted reassurance before voting. She wants to be certain that the agreement will not take precedence over European legislation and whether someone with a dispute has to use European law or this new transatlantic agreement. (Solenn Paulic)