scholarly journals The EU Digital COVID Certificate: A Preliminary Data Protection Impact Assessment

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Oskar Josef GSTREIN

On 20 May 2021, the European Commission, Council and Parliament announced a breakthrough in the trialogue negotiations to establish the European Union (EU) Digital COVID Certificate. Originally, this standardisation effort was labelled as “Digital Green Certificate” and – “[i]n view of the urgency” – presented without a data protection impact assessment. It should allow citizens and residents of Member States to prove that they are either vaccinated against COVID-19, have recently tested negative or are currently immune against the virus. This article considers the proposal from a privacy perspective, taking into account the opinion of EU data protection authorities, ongoing negotiations in the EU institutions and relevant developments on the national and international level. While the European Parliament and others tried to improve the original Commission proposal, questions around the appropriateness and effectiveness of the framework remain. The technological and organisational implementation is essentially left to Member States, who already have started to develop their own tracing and identification systems.

Author(s):  
Petr YAKOVLEV

The decision on Britain’s secession from the European Union, taken by the British Parliament and agreed by London and Brussels, divided the Union history into “before” and “after”. Not only will the remaining member states have to “digest” the political, commercial, economic and mental consequences of parting with one of the largest partners. They will also have to create a substantially new algorithm for the functioning of United Europe. On this path, the EU is confronted with many geopolitical and geo-economic challenges, which should be answered by the new leaders of the European Commission, European Council, and European Parliament.


2000 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 133-145
Author(s):  
Ursula G. Sauer ◽  
Roman Kolar

In 1999, the European Commission presented its second report on the numbers of laboratory animals used in the European Union (EU). The plausibility of the data and the usefulness of the format of the registration tables remain questionable, for reasons previously discussed in connection with the Commission's first statistical report. In addition, it is impossible to derive sound information on trends in animal use in the EU and its Member States from the second statistical report. The European Commission and the Member States have agreed on new tables to be used for future statistics on the use of experimental animals in the EU. These new tables have been significantly extended and improved. Several categories of little relevance have been revised, and ambiguous expressions have been clarified. However, several problems either persist or have been newly created. Moreover, some important data (i.e. categories for pain and distress, as well as for several specific purposes of use; the origin of some animal species; types of institutions; and the use of genetically engineered animals) are still not required. Nevertheless, these are highly relevant to animal welfare and must be regarded as indispensable for a well-aimed application of the statistics to set priorities concerning the Three Rs.


2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 461-494
Author(s):  
Anne-Marie Zell

With the negotiation of its Data Protection Regulation, the European Union seeks to reform an outdated set of laws that has failed to address the evolving data protection challenges inherent in new technologies such as social networks, e-commerce, cloud computing, and location-based services. This article addresses the forthcoming Data Protection Regulation as well as the current state of data protection law in the EU, with a particular focus on Germany. The first part of the article examines Germany's robust data protection framework and the EU's existing authority. The article then raises key issues related to data protection in Germany and the EU—namely, discrepancies in data protection standards and enforcement among EU Member States—as illustrated by recent, high profile cases involving household names like Facebook, Apple, Google, and Amazon. Through this analysis, the article attempts to explain how and why companies doing business in Germany, but established in other EU Member States, are subject to less stringent data protection standards than German companies. Lastly, the article synthesizes the issues in debate with regard to the draft Data Protection Regulation and offers perspectives on what the Regulation could and should mean for data protection in the EU.


elni Review ◽  
2009 ◽  
pp. 79-82
Author(s):  
Ana Barreira

The European Commission has recognised that “[l]aws do not serve their full purpose unless they are properly applied and enforced”. In addition “[t]he European Institutions and the Member States should continue to develop their work to ensure that Community law is correctly applied and implemented”. There are diverse tools for guaranteeing compliance such as compliance indicators, compliance and enforcement strategies and environmental inspections, the purpose of which is to supervise compliance. This article focuses on the latter. Firstly, the way in which this instrument was incorporated under Community environmental policy is examined. Secondly, the current status of environmental inspections at EU level is briefly analysed. Thereafter, it will concentrate on the proposals for the review of this tool, ending with some recommendations on how environmental inspections should be regulated in the European Union with a focus on the demands of European Environmental Bureau (EEB) on this matter.


Author(s):  
Ewa Latoszek ◽  
Agnieszka Kłos

The aim of this article is to present the essence of competition policy and its implementation in the European Union in the context of ongoing globalization of the world economy. The paper will present selected factors that stimulate the process of globalization, main objectives and tools supporting the functioning of the EU internal market, and the place of the European Commission as a body that enforces compliance with the rules of competition by companies and the Member States.


IG ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 85-100
Author(s):  
Nicolai von Ondarza

The Brexit negotiations constituted unchartered political and institutional territory for the European Union (EU). This analysis shows how a new institutional approach enabled the EU-27 to present an unusually united front. The “Barnier method” is characterised by five elements: a strong political mandate from the European Council, a single EU negotiator based in the European Commission in the person of Michel Barnier, very close coordination with the Member States and the European Parliament, and a high degree of transparency. Lessons can also be drawn from this for the next phase of the Brexit negotiations and the EU’s relations with other third countries.


Author(s):  
Dorota Dakowska

Whether higher education (HE) can be defined as a European Union (EU) policy has been matter of debate. Formally, education is still a domestic prerogative, and in principle, the EU can only support and supplement national governments’ initiatives in the sector. Yet, this official division of tasks has been challenged in many ways over the last decades. First, the history of European integration shows that the European community took an early interest in educational matters. The Treaty of Rome established a community competency on vocational training. Subsequently, the European Commission framed HE and vocational training as two entangled policies. Second, the EU institutions, the member states, and noninstitutional actors have coordinated in innovative ways, through soft governance processes promoted by the Bologna Process and the EU Lisbon—and later Europe 2020—strategy, to impose a European HE governance based on standards and comparison. Third, the study of HE requires going beyond an EU-centric perspective, with international organizations such as the OECD and the Council of Europe cooperating closely with the European Commission. HE has been increasingly shaped by global trends, such as the increased competition between universities. The mechanisms of European HE policy change have elicited academic debates. Three main explanations have been put forward: the power of instruments and standards, the impact of the Commission’s funding schemes, and the influence of interconnected experts, stakeholders and networks. Domestic translations of European recommendations are highly diverse and reveal a gap between formal adaptations and local practices. Twenty years after the Bologna declaration, the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) presents a mixed picture. On the one hand, increased mobility and the growing interconnectedness of academic schemes facilitate the launch of ambitious projects such as the “European universities.” On the other hand, concerns are periodically raised about the growing bureaucratization of the process and the widening gap between the small world of the Brussels stakeholders and everyday academic practices in EHEA participant countries. Paradoxically, smaller and non-EU countries have been more actively involved in advancing the EHEA than large, older EU member states.


2020 ◽  
pp. 65-89
Author(s):  
Matthew J. Homewood

This chapter discusses articles in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) that provide for actions that are brought directly before the Court. Under Articles 258 and 259 TFEU (ex Articles 226 and 227 EC), respectively, the European Commission and Member States may bring enforcement proceedings against a Member State in breach of Treaty obligations. Article 260 TFEU (ex Article 228 EC) requires compliance with the Court’s judgment. Article 263 TFEU (ex Article 230 EC) concerns judicial review of EU acts. The outcome of a successful action is annulment. Article 265 TFEU (ex Article 232 EC) provides for actions against the EU institutions for failure to act.


Author(s):  
Matthew J. Homewood

This chapter discusses articles in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) that provide for actions that are brought directly before the Court. Under Articles 258 and 259 TFEU (ex Articles 226 and 227 EC), respectively, the European Commission and Member States may bring enforcement proceedings against a Member State in breach of Treaty obligations. Article 260 TFEU (ex Article 228 EC) requires compliance with the Court’s judgment. Article 263 TFEU (ex Article 230 EC) concerns judicial review of EU acts. The outcome of a successful action is annulment. Article 265 TFEU (ex Article 232 EC) provides for actions against the EU institutions for failure to act.


2019 ◽  
pp. 20-30
Author(s):  
Oleksandr Rudik

The article examines the experience of better regulation in the EU and its member states. The European Union and the 28 EU member states show a strong political commitment towards regulatory reform. In the European Union, regulatory policy has progressed under the better regulation agenda and played a crucial role in shaping the current regulatory processes. At the same time, all EU member states have adopted an explicit policy to promote the quality of regulations. To this end, the author analyses the key findings of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) 2019 report «Better Regulation Practices across the European Union». In the report the OECD has analysed the application of all 28 EU member states’ regulatory management tools to EU-made laws and regulations. The article also gives examples of the best regulatory practices of the EU member states such as Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Malta, the Netherlands, Slovakia, Sweden, the United Kingdom. The article concludes that the experience of the EU and its member states in developing and implementing a better regulation policy, in particular the better regulation agenda, is beneficial for Ukraine. In this regard, the article highlights the following legislative and institutional components of this experience: stakeholder engagement in the process of policymaking and regulatory policy implementation by automatically publishing of draft regulatory acts and accompanying impact assessments on the specially designed interactive government portal; highlighting the preliminary and final stages of regulatory impact assessment of all regulations, except for deregulatory and low-cost measures, thereby taking into account stakeholder comments; regular and systematic conduct of ex ante and ex-post evaluation of laws and regulations on the basis of a specially developed sound evidence-based methodology; conducting of regulatory impact assessment and stakeholder engagement during the process of EU directives transposition into member states’ national legislation; introduction of systematic regulatory oversight and quality control of regulatory management tools, which should cover not only regulatory impact assessment practice but also stakeholder engagement.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document