<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
FYI....this will of course affect the ICANN data escrow requirements
IMHO.<br>
Stephanie Perrin<br>
<div class="moz-forward-container"><br>
<span style="font-family: 'Verdana'; font-size: 13px; color:
rgb(102, 102, 102);"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana';
font-size: 13px; color: rgb(102, 102, 102);"><br>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;
font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><b><span
style="font-size: 18pt; font-family: 'Times New
Roman', serif;" lang="EN">Leaked: European Parliament
long awaited legal study on data retention<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;
font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><b><span
style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New
Roman', serif;" lang="EN">5:27pm | 7 January 2015 |
by <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.accessnow.org/blog/author/61/Estelle%20Masse"
title="Blog posts by Estelle Masse" style="color:
rgb(149, 79, 114);"><span style="color: blue;">Estelle
Masse</span></a>,<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;
font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" lang="EN"> <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;
font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" lang="EN">Tomorrow
morning, the European Parliament legal services will
release its long-awaited study on the Court of Justice
of the EU’s ruling on the <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.accessnow.org/blog/2014/04/11/a-closer-look-at-eu-courts-ruling-and-what-it-means-for-the-future-of-data-"
style="color: rgb(149, 79, 114);"><span style="color:
blue;">Data Retention Directive</span></a>. Access
obtained a <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.accessnow.org/page/-/eu_data_retention.pdf"
style="color: rgb(149, 79, 114);"><span style="color:
blue;">copy of the document</span></a>, which
concludes that the EU’s powers to legislate on data
retention matters are now limited.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;
font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" lang="EN">Last
April, the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.accessnow.org/blog/2014/04/11/a-closer-look-at-eu-courts-ruling-and-what-it-means-for-the-future-of-data-"
style="color: rgb(149, 79, 114);"><span style="color:
blue;">invalidated the EU Data Retention Directive</span></a> due
to several violations of human rights, in particular the
fundamental rights to privacy and data protection.
Adopted in 2006, the Data Retention Directive required
all telecommunications data – including mobile, landline
phones, fax, and email – to be indiscriminately
collected and retained by providers for a minimum of six
months and up to two years. The CJEU’s landmark decision
was broadly welcomed by civil society groups and
activists from all around the world.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;
font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" lang="EN">Following
last year’s ruling, the Civil Liberties Committee of the
European Parliament (LIBE) requested an opinion from
Legal Services to determine its impact on national laws
establishing data retention and other existing
international agreements that include data retention
schemes such<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.accessnow.org/blog/2014/11/26/wishing-bon-voyage-to-pnr-agreements-in-europe"
style="color: rgb(149, 79, 114);"><span style="color:
blue;"> Passenger Name Records agreements</span></a> (PNR)
and the Terrorist Finance Tracking Programme (TFTP).<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;
font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" lang="EN">PNR
agreements authorises the transfer of passenger flight
data between different states where that data can be
stored for up to 15 years for the purposes of combating
terrorism and serious crime. The EU has signed such
agreements with the United States, Canada, and
Australia, and is currently in the process of
negotiating an EU-wide PNR system.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;
font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" lang="EN">The <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.pcworld.com/article/2057140/eu-parliament-votes-to-suspend-data-sharing-deal-with-us.html"
style="color: rgb(149, 79, 114);"><span style="color:
blue;">Terrorist Financing Tracking Program</span></a> is
an international agreement concluded between the EU and
the US which gives authorities access to the SWIFT
database, the world’s biggest financial database located
in Belgium, for the prevention, investigation,
detection, and prosecution of conduct pertaining to
terrorism or terrorist financing.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;
font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" lang="EN">In
the study to be released tomorrow, the European
Parliament legal services indicates that these
agreements, while controversial, are still valid as they
benefit from "presumption of legality". However, the
report then adds “That said, the ‘presumption’ of
legality of EU acts can also be rebutted and so it
cannot be excluded, at this stage, that any other EU act
could suffer the same fate as the data retention
Directive”. Therefore, all existing agreements currently
in place remains valid, however, citizens can request
the Commission to look into the validity of these
agreements, or they can choose to take legal action to
test their validity. In a similar situation, the
European Parliament decided last December to send the
EU-Canada PNR agreement, currently being reviewed, in
front of the CJEU to <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.accessnow.org/blog/2014/11/26/wishing-bon-voyage-to-pnr-agreements-in-europe"
style="color: rgb(149, 79, 114);"><span style="color:
blue;">check its compliance</span></a> with the EU
Charter.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;
font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" lang="EN">Regarding
the ongoing negotiations on an EU PNR system and future
EU proposal including data retention measures, the EP
legal services reaffirms the CJEU’s assessment that “the
EU legislature’s discretion is ‘reduced’” and should
therefore strictly follow the instructions laid out by
the Court in its ruling. As a result, every time EU
institutions consider developing legislative acts
putting in place requirement for the “storage of the
data of a very large number of unsuspected persons and
access to and use of such data by law enforcement
authorities”, the legislators will need to strictly
apply the principles of proportionality and necessity
and must ensure that the proposed measures are in line
with the EU Charter. The report adds that “great care
must therefore be taken in such cases to ensure full
respect, at all stage of the legislative procedure, for
the Charter.”<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;
font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" lang="EN">Concerning
member states’ existing legislation on data retention,
the EP legal services clarifies that, while the ruling
does not outlaw these national laws, it does created a
“twofold effect”. First, since member states are no
longer obliged by law to retain communication data, they
can then decide to repeal their related laws - as
several countries such as <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.bna.com/following-european-court-n17179891902/"
style="color: rgb(149, 79, 114);"><span style="color:
blue;">Austria</span></a> or<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://edri.org/romania-aftermath-of-second-ccr-data-retention-ruling/"
style="color: rgb(149, 79, 114);"><span style="color:
blue;">Romania</span></a> have done since the
ruling. Second, if member states were to decide to keep
measures for the retention of communication data, such
rules would fall under EU legislation from 2002, the
so-called <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32002L0058:en:HTML"
style="color: rgb(149, 79, 114);"><span style="color:
blue;">E-privacy Directive</span></a>.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;
font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" lang="EN">Therefore,
member states must ensure that their national laws on
data retention comply with the EU Charter of Fundamental
Rights and fulfill the requirements laid down in the
E-privacy Directive regarding the principles of
proportionality and necessity. And perhaps, most
importantly, the report then adds that all the criteria
set out by the Court in its ruling on the need for
safeguards, proportionality and the “existence of clear
and precise rules” must be included in these national
laws. As a result all existing national acts on data
retention should be examined on a case-by-case basis to
check their compliance with those criteria. It is
already clear that laws in place in several EU countries
- such as France or the UK, <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.accessnow.org/blog/2014/07/18/is-the-uk-data-retention-and-investigatory-powers-act-in-breach-of-eu-law"
style="color: rgb(149, 79, 114);"><span style="color:
blue;">which recently expanded its surveillance
powers</span></a> - would have difficulty passing
that test.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;
font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" lang="EN">Access
welcomes the European Parliament legal study. This
report brings needed clarity on the legality of data
retention practices - at a time when the EU is
negotiating new legislation such as the EU PNR, and is
about to renegotiate existing agreements such as the
EU-Canada PNR, the EU-US PNR and the TFTP agreements.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;
font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" lang="EN">2015
is turning out to be the year of data retention in
Europe. It is now up to us all - activists, civil
society groups, lawyers, lawmakers - to ensure that any
proposal put forward is both in line with the EU Charter
of Fundamental Rights and the principles of
proportionality and necessity.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;
font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><o:p> </o:p></div>
</div>
</span></span>
<br>
</div>
<br>
</body>
</html>