European data protection commissioners (DPCs) last week strongly ...
European data protection commissioners (DPCs) last week strongly criticized a European Commission (EC) proposal to force communications service providers to retain Internet and telephone traffic data for 12-36 months, calling the plan legally unacceptable. In a Nov. 9 preliminary…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
opinion on the data retention proposal -- originally floated by France, the U.K., Sweden and Ireland -- the EC’s Art. 29 data protection working party said it has “considerable doubts” that the draft directive meets several criteria fundamental to human rights laws. First, DPCs said, the aim of the draft is unclear, making it impossible to know whether it’s a legitimate aim of traffic interception. Moreover, they said, such interference must respond to a “pressing social need.” “The routine, comprehensive storage of all traffic data, user and participant data proposed in the draft decision would make surveillance that is authorised in exceptional circumstances the rule,” which is clearly disproportionate to the need of the law enforcement community, the working party said. Analysis carried out by telcos shows the largest amount of data sought by law enforcement agencies isn’t more than 6 months old, DPCs said. Moreover, they said, representatives from law enforcement agencies “have failed to provide any evidence as to the need for such far reaching measures.” The Council of Europe cybercrime treaty permits individual secure storage of data on a “fast-freeze -- quick thaw” model that’s entirely adequate for preventing or prosecuting crimes, DPCs said. “It is characteristic of current legal discussions that the present proposal is being seriously discussed before the Convention on Cybercrime has entered into force in most signatory states and its practical consequences can be assessed.”