Brussels, 13/10/2015 (Agence Europe) - The European Parliament's civil liberties (LIBE) committee held an initial exchange of views on Monday 12 October on the consequences of the ruling by the Court of Justice of the EU invalidating the Safe Harbor decision which has, since 2000, governed the transfer of personal data between the EU and the US.
Some MEPs, and in particular the rapporteur on the data protection regulation, Jan-Philipp Albrecht (Greens/EFA, Germany), felt that the Court ruling made negotiation of a “Safe Harbor +” impossible. “The European Commission has to acknowledge that something went awry in coming to this decision (Safe Harbor)”, he said. “There are still people who argue that we need a Safe Harbor. This isn't possible. It can't be done”, he argued, adding that that was the message the Commission should have been sending from 6 October. “The US government has to be made to understand that the ball is in its court. The US government has to provide an equivalent level of protection”.
Sophie in 't Veld (ALDE, Netherlands) said that the ruling could not be said to have come as a surprise, the Court having “done nothing other than ask that the law be applied” and MEPs having many times called for Safe Harbor to be suspended. “I don't think that those who say time is needed to address this situation have a valid argument”, she went on. She pointed out that her group had asked the European Commission to draw the lessons of the ruling for other mechanisms that could also be affected, such as the PNR (passenger name records), the TFTP, arrangements on public procurement outside the EU and national laws on mass surveillance. She called on the Commission not to sidestep the issue of cooperation with the US which will also be affected by improvements in data protection standards. The Dutch MEP also slammed the weakness of the law makers, commission and Parliament included. The directive on data retention was invalidated by the Court in 2014: “We knew it was a poor law, that it would never pass muster”, she said, calling, too, on the Parliament to be more vigilant in the laws it adopts. “We, too, have to pass laws that hold up - so let's be more critical” (our translation throughout), she urged.
The Parliament's legal department highlighted the important elements of the ruling, underlining that, while a framework such as Safe Harbor is acceptable in theory, the level of protection provided by the third country must be equivalent to that of the EU and this must be enshrined in law. The other crucial point in adequacy decisions has to be the right to effective recourse. If a third country's legislation allows mass surveillance, then this, too, must count against any adequacy decision. The services of Commissioner Vera Jourova are due to meet their US counterparts this week. Jourova is also due to meet the Article 29 group, which brings together the national data protection authorities, to discuss the implications of the Court ruling. The Commission is looking to work on guidance that will ensure the ruling is applied consistently across the member states. (Original version in French by Solenn Paulic)