|
search / subscribe / upload / contact |
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
| RSS-Feed Depeschen |  |
|
|
||
|
||
Date: 2002-07-31
EU: Datenspeicherung, naechster Schritt-.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- On may 30 the European Parliament passed the Directive on privacy in the electronic communications, even if 133 MEPs - including myself as EP rapporteur - tried to oppose the inclusion of a general "data retention" provision, claiming the risk of new national and european-wide data retention obbligations. The two main EP political groups (the Populars, with Ana Palacio, and the socialists, with Elena Paciotti) and the European Commission replied that there was not such a risk and that the existing guarantees were adequate. Few days later, new data retention rules were approved by the Spanish Parliament, and the British Government presented a proposal to allow data retention without the need for a Court order. The EU Danish Presidency is now moving on the same direction. Even if on July 7 the EU Council replied to my Written question (H-0485/02) that "there was no proposal of EU legislative act about data retention", the Danish Presidency had already submitted on June 24 a Proposal for Council Conclusion (a so-called "soft-law" act, not formalised in the EU Treaties) "on information technology related measures concerning the investgation and prosecution of organised crime http://register.consilium.eu.int/pdf/en/02/st10/10358en2.pdf Among other things, the proposal: "urges that within the very near future, binding rules should be established on the approximation of Member States rules on the obligation of telecommunications services providers to keep information concerning telecommunications in order to ensure that such information is available when it is of significance for a criminal investigation"; "such bindings rules must be established taking account of the requirements regarding privacy which stem from European Convention on Human Rights...etc". There is no mention at all to the principles of proportionality and necessity in specific cases, or even to any requirement of case by case authorization by judicial or competent authorities. On the 16 of September the Council Multidisciplinary Group on Organised Crime (which in its composition reflects just the law enforcement perspective) will meet again to finalize the text. It would now be interesting to see the reaction from our colleagues that accused us of alarmistic behaviour during the EP debate as well as from the Commission. With the Transnational Radical Party we will oppose this further move toward european general surveillance. For information, please contact +32-284-7496 - -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- edited by Harkank published on: 2002-07-31 comments to office@quintessenz.at subscribe Newsletter - -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- 
|
|
|
 |
related topiqs |
 |
/q/depeschen |
 |
related links |
 |
CURRENTLY RUNNING |
q/Talk 1.Juli: The Danger of Software Users Don't Control
|
|