login
login
Image header Agence Europe
Europe Daily Bulletin No. 12651
DEAL EU/UK / Justice/home affairs

European Parliament Committee on Civil Liberties has doubts about data transfers to UK

The European Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties (LIBE) was due to adopt, on the evening of Thursday 4 February, its opinion on the Trade and Cooperation Agreement between the European Union and the United Kingdom, which provisionally entered into force on 1 January.

Amendments had been introduced, notably on compliance with the standards of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), but also on the trust that the EU should have in the United Kingdom when it comes to the processing of personal data of European citizens.

This opinion should feed into the draft report prepared by the Committees on International Trade (INTA) and Foreign Affairs (AFET), which is supposed to lead to the ratification of the bilateral agreement by Parliament. They were also working on the subject at the same time (see other news).

Firstly, the LIBE Committee welcomes the inclusion of references to respect for democracy, the Rule of law and the protection of fundamental rights, notably as set out in the ECHR, which the United Kingdom will have to respect in order to benefit from cooperation in the police and judicial fields.

The LIBE Committee also welcomes the “inclusion of specific termination, non-application and suspension provisions” provided for in the dispute settlement system included in the agreement. Bilateral cooperation may be suspended or stopped in the event of serious and systemic deficiencies in the respect of fundamental rights, data protection or the Rule of law.

MEPs also welcome new cooperation arrangements such as the exchange of DNA data under the Prüm Convention and are pleased that close cooperation with the Europol and Eurojust agencies has been maintained.

However, on the issue of personal data of air passengers (PNR), the Parliamentary committee is concerned that special purpose use has been granted in the UK on the basis of a “risk of death or serious injury or a significant risk to public health”. In its view, this motive for processing Europeans’ data “is not in line with the exchange of PNR data between Member States”.

On asylum and illegal migration, however, the LIBE Committee regrets the absence of specific provisions in the agreement. This agreement should have “at least contained provisions that strengthen safe and legal channels of access to international protection, including through family reunification, as family reunification continues to be important for asylum seekers who reside in the UK and have family in the EU”, she said.

Personal data

As regards data protection more generally, the Parliamentary committee wonders about the transitional regime contained in the EU/UK agreement to settle the issue of personal data protection (see EUROPE 12632/11).

It therefore has “serious doubts” about the level of protection of such data guaranteed by the scheme. This interim solution, it says, is based on the assumption that the UK has transposed EU legislation correctly and on time.

However, MEPs consider that UK rules on data retention are contrary to the EU acquis. This is evidenced by the January judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU (see EUROPE 12575/13). They therefore consider that an adequacy decision cannot, as it stands, be granted in the UK, as the latter does not offer “substantially equivalent” protection to that of the EU.

Link to the draft LIBE opinion: http://bit.ly/3ttCmig  

Legal affairs 

The European Parliament’s Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) adopted its opinion (24 votes in favour, one against) at the end of January. In particular, it regrets that judicial cooperation in civil matters is not part of the agreement (see EUROPE 12637/3) and stresses the need to reach “as soon as possible” a common understanding in this area and on the recognition and enforcement of judgments.

Another drawback for the JURI Committee is the lack of a solution for family issues and parental responsibility. The text recalls that this was a firm request by Parliament from the very beginning of the negotiations.

See the letter from the JURI Committee: https://bit.ly/3ayDUPp

(Original version in French by Solenn Paulic with Sophie Petitjean and Marion Fontana)

Contents

EU RESPONSE TO COVID-19
DEAL EU/UK
SECTORAL POLICIES
SOCIAL AFFAIRS
INSTITUTIONAL
SECURITY - DEFENCE
EXTERNAL ACTION
ECONOMY - FINANCE - BUSINESS
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EU
NEWS BRIEFS