20150128 Zukunft des Safe Harbor

28.01.2015 Zukunft des Safe Harbor

How to deal with the different data protection niveau in the EU and the USA

Today Aktion Freiheit statt Angst has joined the meeting of the German data protection officers on the 9th European Data Protection Day in the Berliner Abgeordnetenhaus. The discussions dealt with the possibilities of Europe belonging the Safe Harbor agreement after Snowden.

Here we repeat the press release of this meeting:

PRESS RELEASE 9th European Data Protection Day

Der Hamburgische Beauftragte für Datenschutz und Informationsfreiheit
Hamburg

January 28*2015

Alienation or Convergence?

Not just since the revelations of Edward Snowden the question, how to protect data protection rights in states with democratic constitutions, has become a central political issue of the relationship between EU and the USA. The Conference of the Data Protection Commissioners of the Federal and the Federal States (DSK) has taken up this topic and called a meeting of experts from politics, the economy, science and administration within the framework of the todays 9* European Data Protection Day. Under the heading: "Europe: A safe harbour of data protection" they will be discussing how, in the future, the different levels of data protection in the EU and the USA are to be dealt with.

The systematic mass surveillance by the NSA and the collaboration of western secret Services and the public debate, although so far without any recognisable consequences mark a caesura. The understanding of what is meant by private sphere and digital self-determination and the relationship between State and Citizens on both sides of the Atlantic is increasingly polarised and the huge differences in legal cultures begin to come even more apparent: Whereas on the one side there is the threat of the dismantling of rule-of-law structures äs well äs the annulment of basic rights in favour of a preventive state. There is on the other side a discussion under way concerning an extensive codification of data protection with the aim not less than a redefinition of the protection of the private sphere.

The Conference will concern itself with the phenomenon of the partners who are becoming increasingly alienated over differences regarding matters of data protection and the arising questions äs its result. In addition to the analysis of legal cultural differences and their causes, possibilities offered by the General Data Protection Regulation for limiting the excessive collecting of data are to be dealt with.
In the light of extensive causeless access to the data of European citizens by US-security agencies also to data of European citizens that are in the possession of US-business enterprises this is also a explicitly a matter of the legitimisation of the transfer of the data of private companies from the EU to the USA. The impact of the lack of fundamental data protection conditions for the transfer of data to the USA are to be discussed in this connection. It is precisely those authorities who are responsible for monitoring data protection who are faced with the task of reviewing critically the preconditions for the transfer of data to the USA and thus prevent unlawful transfers in the future.

The organiser of this year's meeting Johannes Caspar, the Hamburg Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information states: "The debate about the handling of fundamental digital rights must be continued openly and explicitly. This is particularly true against the background of the recent terrible terrorist attacks in Paris and the fact that matters of inner security have once again landed at the very top of the agenda since then. The weighing up of matters of freedom and of security presupposes the critical rationality of all actors involved in the discussion. Plans to re-introduce Instruments of unfounded surveillance such äs the retention of telecommunication data or passenger name records or the prohibition of encryption of e-mail communication do not help at all. They divert the attention away from the fact that clear answers to the question of protection against systematic mass surveillance in international data transfer are still outstanding. The recognition of the right to a private sphere, free communication and the effective creation of legal remedies for EU-citizens remain fundamental requirement äs does the restriction of access on the part of US-security authorities to data in accordance with the democratic requirements of necessity and appropriateness. Today's Conference will contribute to stress the importance of a common foundation in matters of data protection between Europe and the USA and furthermore demonstrate the negative consequences for the European-American economic relationships should such a foundation not be laid äs soon äs possible."

Der Hamburgische Beauftragte für Datenschutz und Informationsfreiheit
E-Mail: presse@datenschutz.hamburg.de Klosterwall 6, 20095 Hamburg

Kommentar: RE: 20150128 Zukunft des Safe Harbor

Hat die Bundesdatenschutzbeauftragte auf dem Treffen am 28.1. etwa was gelernt? Kritiker werfen ihr immer wieder mangelnde Kompetenz und kein Interesse für Bürgerrechte vor, doch nun legt Andrea Voßhoff plötzlich ein Bekenntnis gegen neue Pläne zur Vorratsdatenspeicherung vor. Man kann es aber auch anders lesen, wenn sie sagt, dass " die Vorratsdatenspeicherung nach einem Urteil des Europäischen Gerichtshofs vom April 2014 nur noch unter strengen Auflagen möglich ist und somit letztlich keinen Erfolg etwa bei den Ermittlungen der Behörden bieten würde."Vielleicht wollte sie lieber eine TOTALE Vorratsdatenspeicherung ohne die Einschränkungen des Europäischen Gerichtshofs? (s. http://www.golem.de/news/andrea-vosshoff-datenschutzbeauftragte-jetzt-gegen-vorratsdatenspeicherung-1502-112075.html und http://forum.golem.de/kommentare/security/andrea-vosshoff-datenschutzbeauftragte-jetzt-gegen-vorratsdatenspeicherung/vosshoff-ist-fuer-vorratsdatenspeicherung/89727,4038632,4038680,read.html )

Sofie, 02.02.2015 08:36