Balancing in the GDPR

2020 ◽  
pp. 277-330
Author(s):  
Jef Ausloos
Keyword(s):  
Iterative Process ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Clear Cut ◽  
Ex Post ◽  
Fundamental Rights And Freedoms ◽  
Basic Infrastructure ◽  
The Right ◽  
Data Subject ◽  
Conflicts Of Rights

This chapter takes a step back and looks at fair balancing acts induced by invoking the right to erasure. It starts with comparing balancing of fundamental rights and freedoms in the Charter with balancing in the GDPR. Indeed, it re-emphasizes how the GDPR as a whole, essentially constitutes a framework for fair balancing of rights, freedoms, and interests in the context of personal data processing. The chapter then lays out the actual blueprint for such fair balancing in the GDPR. It becomes clear how fair balancing in the GDPR is an iterative process, with ex ante and ex post balancing acts. The former need to be performed before processing initiates, and the latter refer to subsequent balances as triggered by data subject rights for example. Overall, the very nature of fair balancing does not allow for clear-cut, categorical answers to conflicts of rights, freedoms, and/or interests. Instead the GDPR should be looked at as defining the basic infrastructure for ensuring fair balancing, further to be refined by relevant stakeholders. This can notably happen through standards or certification mechanisms, guidance by authorities, and by controllers themselves.

Foundations of Data Protection Law

2020 ◽  
pp. 37-116
Author(s):  
Jef Ausloos
Keyword(s):  
Data Protection ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Historical Overview ◽  
Legislative History ◽  
Ex Post ◽  
Technological Developments ◽  
Data Protection Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights And Freedoms ◽  
The Right

Chapter 2 lays the groundwork for the rest of the book, clearly delineating the fundamental right to data protection, its relation to the GDPR, and the right to erasure in it. The historical overview demonstrates that the emergence of data protection is inherently tied to technological developments and how these may amplify power asymmetries. It is also made clear that informational self-determination or control over personal data lies at the heart of the fundamental right to data protection as proclaimed in Article 8 Charter. This is a clear difference with the GDPR that has a much wider prerogative, ie protecting all fundamental rights and freedoms whenever personal data is being processed. Put differently, whereas Article 8 Charter safeguards a minimum level of control over one’s personal data, the GDPR installs a fair balancing framework that safeguards any and all fundamental rights and freedoms as they are affected by the processing of personal data. The substantive provisions of the GDPR can be divided into four categories along the lines of ex ante v ex post and protective v empowerment measures (see data protection matrix). This chapter ends with positioning the right to erasure within the GDPR’s arsenal of ex post empowerment measures, describing its legislative history as well as its main benefits and drawbacks.

scholarly journals Data eetention in CJEU Case Law

2020 ◽  
Vol 54 (4) ◽  
pp. 1231-1252
Author(s):  
Tatjana Bugarski ◽  
Milana Pisarić
Keyword(s):  
Personal Data ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Data Retention ◽  
Electronic Communications ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Fundamental Rights And Freedoms ◽  
The Right

Possession of accurate, complete and reliable relevant data on electronic communications traffic and timely access of authorized competent state bodies to such data is without a doubt a useful tool in the fight against modern forms of crime. For that reason, it is justified to establish an obligation for providers of electronic communications services to keep certain data on communications for a certain period of time in the realization of which they mediate and to hand over that data at the request of authorized state bodies, in order to use them for legitimate purposes. For this reason, the Data Retention Directive was adopted in 2006, which Member States were required to transpose into national law. However, data retention poses a risk to basic human rights and freedoms, if the regulation establishing this obligation does so without respecting the essence of these rights and freedoms, especially the right to privacy and rights related to the processing of personal data, for which reason the Court of Justice of the European Union declared the Directive invalid is 2014. Despite this decision, Member States continue to regulate the obligation to retain data in their national regulations. In this regard, the question of compliance of these regulations with the fundamental rights and freedoms and principles of the Union is raised. The subject of the paper is the analysis of the case law of the Court of Justice of the EU on this issue after the annulment of the Data Retention Directive.

scholarly journals The protection of personal data in the field of judicial cooperation in criminal matters: special reference to Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 92-102
Author(s):  
Maria Belén Sánchez Domingo
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Public Security ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
The Right ◽  
High Level ◽  
Criminal Matters

The new European framework for the protection of personal data on freedom, security and justice is embodied, among other instruments, in EU Directive 2016/680 on the protection of natural persons with regards to the processing of personal data by competent authorities for criminal law purposes. This Directive protects fundamental rights, such as the right to the protection of personal data, as well as ensuring a high level of public security by facilitating the exchange of personal data between competent authorities within the Union, with the establishment of a legal system on the transfer of personal data.

Conditions of the Right to Erasure

2020 ◽  
pp. 196-274
Author(s):  
Jef Ausloos
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
Historical Research ◽  
Legal Obligation ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Third ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
The Right ◽  
Data Subject

This chapter zooms in on Article 17 GDPR, on the right to erasure (‘right to be forgotten’). It meticulously dissects the three paragraphs of this provision. The first paragraph lists six rights-to-erasure triggers which can be summarized as: (a) purpose expiration; (b) withdrawal of consent; (c) right to object; (d) unlawful processing; (e) legal obligation; and (f) withdrawal of consent by minors in the online environment. The second paragraph comprises an odd extension of the right to erasure, enabling data subjects to request that controllers who have made the personal data public, communicate potential erasure to anyone else processing that same personal data. The third paragraph lists five exemptions to the right to erasure, summarized as: (a) freedom of expression and information; (b) legal obligation or task carried out in the public interest or official authority; (c) public interest in the area of public health; (d) public interest archiving, scientific and historical research, or statistical purposes; and (e) legal claims. What becomes clear right away is how both the right-to-erasure’s triggers and exemptions all refer to other legal provisions in and outside the GDPR. As such, the right to erasure can be seen as a central hub in the GDPR, bringing together key data protection principles from the perspective of data subject empowerment.

scholarly journals Right of Access under GDPR and Copyright

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 221-246
Author(s):  
Angela Sobolčiaková
Keyword(s):  
Data Protection ◽  
Copyright Protection ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Main Question ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
Access Right ◽  
Right Of Access ◽  
Data Subject

The paper discusses the right to obtain a copy of personal data based on the access right guaranteed in Articles 15 (3) and limited in 15 (4) of the GDPR. Main question is to what extent, the access right provided to data subject under the data protection rules is compatible with copyright. We argue that the subject matter of Article 15 (3) of the GDPR - copy of personal data – may infringe copyright protection of third parties but not a copyright protection attributed to the data controllers.Firstly, because the right of access and copyright may be in certain circumstances incompatible. Secondly, the data controllers are primarily responsible for balancing conflicting rights and neutral balancing exercise could only be applied by the Data Protection Authorities. Thirdly, the case law of the CJEU regarding this issue will need to be developed because the copy as a result of access right may be considered as a new element in data protection law.

scholarly journals Recenzja książki Vasiliki Kosta, Fundamental Rights in EU Internal Market Legislation, Oxford and Portland, Oregon 2015, 330 s.

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 261-270
Author(s):  
Joanna Ryszka
Keyword(s):  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
Internal Market ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Personal Data Protection ◽  
Basic Rights ◽  
Scientific Analysis ◽  
The Right ◽  
Integration Area ◽  
The Eu

Implementation of the internal market is one of the basic aims of cooperation between Member States within the EU, being at the same time an integration area that is perceived positively by both their supporters and opponents. Issues related to the implementation of the internal market freedoms are even more interesting in its confrontation with the protection of fundamental rights. This is undoubtedly a significant issue when we think about the degree of identification of the Union citizens with the Union itself. The reviewed monograph takes all the above-mentioned elements, focusing in particular on examining how and to what extent the protection of these rights is implemented in the EU legislation on the internal market. The scientific analysis carried out within its scope covered such important and basic rights as personal data protection, freedom of expression, basic rights related to the performance of work and the right to health protection.

scholarly journals The HES-code and the data protection during COVID-19 pandemic in Turkey

Bioethica ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 69
Author(s):  
Sabah Mine Cangil
Keyword(s):  
Data Protection ◽  
Mobile Applications ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
Health Data ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
Legal Problems ◽  
Fundamental Rights And Freedoms ◽  
The Individual

Mobile applications are a beneficial tool to fight the coronavirus. With the mobile tracing applications, it became easier to cut the chain of transmission of the virus and reduce the number of daily cases. Many countries developed their applications and made them available to their citizens. While using these applications, it is necessary to protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual. This frequent processing of individuals' health data has created legal problems regarding the protection of personal data. The purpose of this paper is to present a study on the Turkish Covid-19 tracing application “Hayat Eve Sığar-HES” and the legal issues behind the application. 

The Right to Erasure in EU Data Protection Law

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jef Ausloos
Keyword(s):  
Data Protection ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Individual Autonomy ◽  
General Data Protection Regulation ◽  
Power Asymmetries ◽  
The Face ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
Data Protection Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
Data Subject

This book critically investigates the role of data subject rights in countering information and power asymmetries online. It aims at dissecting ‘data subject empowerment’ in the information society through the lens of the right to erasure (‘right to be forgotten’) in Article 17 of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). In doing so, it provides an extensive analysis of the interaction between the GDPR and the fundamental right to data protection in Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (Charter), how data subject rights affect fair balancing of fundamental rights, and what the practical challenges are to effective data subject rights. The book starts with exploring the data-driven asymmetries that characterize individuals’ relationship with tech giants. These commercial entities increasingly anticipate and govern how people interact with each other and the world around them, affecting core values such as individual autonomy, dignity, and freedom. The book explores how data protection law, and data subject rights in particular, enable resisting, breaking down or at the very least critically engaging with these asymmetric relationships. It concludes that despite substantial legal and practical hurdles, the GDPR’s right to erasure does play a meaningful role in furthering the fundamental right to data protection (Art 8 Charter) in the face of power asymmetries online.

Ensure the Inviolability of Personal Life in the Conduct of Police Preventive Activities

Law and World ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 51-59
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
Private Life ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
National Courts ◽  
European Court ◽  
Principle Of Proportionality ◽  
The Right

The paper addresses the basic rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution of Georgia, in particular, issues related to personal data. The development of information technology has had a significant impact on the dangers of illegal processing of personal data. The European Court of Human Rights considers the inviolability of private life as a precondition for human autonomy, independent development and protection of human dignity. According to the norms of international law, the right to respect for private life is recognized as one of the most important and fundamental rights, the protection of which is indicated by the legislation of Georgia. The aim of the paper is to analyze the legislation and practice of police law in the field of protection of the right to privacy and to offer relevant recommendations, taking into account the standards set by European and national courts. Human rights legislation must ensure the protection of all human beings against the abuse of state power. Interference with rights must be based on the principle of proportionality. The use of policing should not pose an excessive threat of fundamental human rights violations. Interference with a particular right must be done under principle of proportionality to achieve a certain public good. In clarifying the issue of alleged violation of the right, special attention should be paid to the severity and probability of the expected threat to legal good. The Constitution of Georgia, EU and Council of Europe data protection standards, national legislation, as well as the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and the National Constitutional Court are analyzed around the topic. In addition, the reports of the State Inspector, the Public Defender and the relevant scientific literature are used to study the above issues.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document