Data Protection in Law Enforcement and Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 148-166
Author(s):  
Rastislav Funta ◽  
Peter Ondria
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
Scientific Article ◽  
European Law ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Criminal Matters ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The redesign of data protection in the police and judicial area is intended to create uniformity at the European level for the citizens of EU Member States. This scientific article analyses the subject of data protection in law enforcement and judicial cooperation in criminal matters. The focus is primarily on the existing provisions and the latest developments of the EU with regard to Directive (EU) 2016/680 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by competent authorities for the purposes of the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA. The international level with regard to data protection in the police and judicial area and possible changes due to the developments in data protection under European law are also examined in more detail.

Data protection and passenger name record in judicial criminal matters under the EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement

2021 ◽  
pp. 203228442199492
Author(s):  
Catherine Van de Heyning
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
Cooperation Agreement ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Record Data ◽  
Criminal Matters ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

The submission discusses the provisions in the EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement on data protection as well as the consequences for the exchange of passenger name record data in the field of criminal and judicial cooperation. The author concludes that the impact of the Agreement will depend on the resolvement of the United Kingdom to uphold the standards of protection of personal data equivalent to the EU’s in order to reach an adequacy decision.

scholarly journals Consultation of EU Immigration Databases for Law Enforcement Purposes: a Privacy and Data Protection Assessment

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 139-177
Author(s):  
Niovi Vavoula
Keyword(s):  
Information Systems ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
Private Life ◽  
The Past ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Third Country Nationals

Abstract Since the past three decades, an elaborate framework of EU-wide information systems processing the personal data of third-country nationals has emerged. The vast majority of these systems (VIS, Eurodac, EES, ETIAS) are conceptualised as multi-purpose tools, whereby their consultation for crime-related objectives is listed among their ancillary objectives. As a result, immigration records may be accessed by national law enforcement authorities and Europol for the purposes of fighting terrorism and other serious crimes under specified and limited conditions. Drawing from the relevant jurisprudence of the European Court, this article evaluates whether the EU rules on law enforcement access to EU immigration databases comply with the rights to respect for private life and protection of personal data, as enshrined in Article 7 and 8 of the EU Charter respectively. In addition, challenges posed by the forthcoming interoperability between databases are also examined.

Caught Between National and Supranational Values: Limitations to Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters as Part of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice within the European Union

2008 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-72
Author(s):  
Olivia den Hollander
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Third ◽  
The One ◽  
Criminal Matters ◽  
The Eu

AbstractCurrently, the European Union is based on both supranational (first pillar) and international (second and third pillar) law. The third pillar signifies police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters and although formally based on international law, it has been under increasing "supranational pressure" by the developments in the "Area of Freedom, Security and Justice". This Area is focused on a set of common values and principles closely tied to those of the single market and its four "freedoms". The main argument of this article is that the legal framework of the third pillar is an impediment to judicial cooperation in criminal matters in general, and to the coordination of conflicts of jurisdiction and the principle of ne bis in idem in particular. The legal framework of the third pillar finds itself in the middle of an identity crisis, since it can neither be identified as a traditional intergovernmental, nor as a supranational institutional framework. Criminal law is a politically sensitive matter, which on the one hand explains why the EU member states are reluctant to submit their powers over the issue to the European level and on the other hand, it implies that if the EU member states really want to cooperate on such an intensive level, they will have to submit some of their powers in order to strengthen EU constitutional law. The article suggests a reform of the third pillar through the method of "communitization", which is exactly what will happen in case the EU Reform Treaty will enter into force. This would offer the ingredients for a true international community in which the ambitious agenda of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice can realise its aim of a common set of values and principles which supersedes those of each of the member states individually.

scholarly journals Data Protection and the EPPO

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-43
Author(s):  
Paul De Hert ◽  
Vagelis Papakonstantinou
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Data Processing ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Specific Level ◽  
European Public ◽  
Regulatory Model ◽  
Regulatory Landscape ◽  
The Eu

The European Public Prosecutor’s Office (the ‘EPPO’) necessarily processes personal data in order to fulfil its mission; As such, it falls squarely within the European Union (EU) data protection regulatory landscape. However, because the EU data protection regulatory landscape itself is currently found at a crossroads, an analysis of the EPPO data protection model may be twofold: First, placing it within the proper cross-organization dialogue currently taking place on the future regulatory model of personal data processing for law enforcement purposes carried out at EU level. Second, at an EPPO-specific level, whereby the actual data protection regime afforded to it may be assessed. This article purports to elaborate upon the above two data protection dimensions of EPPO personal data processing activities: It presents considerations and policy options during the lawmaking period that resulted in the establishment of the EPPO, it analyses the data protection regime ultimately awarded to it and attempts to, critically, place the EPPO data protection model within its proper operational and legislative environment.

scholarly journals The Right to Privacy—A Fundamental Right in Search of Its Identity: Uncovering the CJEU’s Flawed Concept of the Right to Privacy

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (05) ◽  
pp. 722-733 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valentin M. Pfisterer
Keyword(s):  
Data Protection ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Political ◽  
Strong Impact ◽  
Right To Privacy ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

AbstractIn recent years, the CJEU has impressively brought to bear the protection of the fundamental rights to privacy and protection of personal data as contained in the CFREU. The Court’s decisions in the Digital Rights, Schrems, Tele2, and PNR cases have reshaped the political and legal landscape in Europe and beyond. By restricting the powers of the governments of EU Member States and annulling legislative acts enacted by the EU legislator, the decisions had, and continue to have, effects well beyond the respective individual cases. Despite their strong impact on privacy and data protection across Europe, however, these landmark decisions reveal a number of flaws and inconsistencies in the conceptualization of the rights to privacy and protection of personal data as endorsed and interpreted by the CJEU. This Article identifies and discusses some of the shortcomings revealed in the recent CJEU privacy and data protection landmark decisions and proposes to the CJEU a strategy aimed at resolving these shortcomings going forward.

scholarly journals Projekt reformy ochrony danych osobowych - czy rzeczywiście powstanie jednolity i spójny system?

2014 ◽  
pp. 93-125
Author(s):  
Agnieszka Grzelak
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
General System ◽  
Consistent System ◽  
Personal Data Protection ◽  
Criminal Matters ◽  
The Eu

In January 2014 two years passed since the European Commission presented a package of reforms of the system of personal data protection in the EU. Com‑ mission proposed to create, in its opinion, a uniform and consistent system across the EU. The idea of the paper is to answer the question whether the Commission’s proposal to adopt two separate acts (one as a general system, and the second for cooperation in criminal matters and police), should meet the proposed assumptions. In order to analyze that, first the treaty background is presented, then current legal status in the field of personal data in the EU, and finally a comparative analysis of the solutions of the two drafts. The analysis leads to the conclusion that there are serious concerns about the lack of consistency.

scholarly journals GEOGRAPHIC DATA AS PERSONAL DATA IN FOUR EU MEMBER STATES

2016 ◽  
Vol III-2 ◽  
pp. 151-157 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. J. de Jong ◽  
B. van Loenen ◽  
J. A. Zevenbergen
Keyword(s):  
Data Protection ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
Topographic Maps ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
Geographic Data ◽  
Protection Legislation ◽  
The Eu

The EU Directive 95/46/EC on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data aims at harmonising data protection legislation in the European Union. This should promote the free flow of products and services within the EU. This research found a wide variety of interpretations of the application of data protection legislation to geographic data. The variety was found among the different EU Member States, the different stakeholders and the different types of geographic data. In the Netherlands, the Data Protection Authority (DPA) states that panoramic images of streets are considered personal data. While Dutch case law judges that the data protection legislation does not apply if certain features are blurred and no link to an address is provided. The topographic datasets studied in the case studies do not contain personal data, according to the Dutch DPA, while the German DPA and the Belgian DPA judge that topographic maps of a large scale can contain personal data, and impose conditions on the processing of topographic maps. The UK DPA does consider this data outside of the scope of legal definition of personal data. The patchwork of differences in data protection legislation can be harmonised by using a traffic light model. This model focuses on the context in which the processing of the data takes place and has four categories of data: (1) sensitive personal data, (2) personal data, (3), data that can possibly lead to identification, and (4) non-personal data. For some geographic data, for example factual data that does not reveal sensitive information about a person, can be categorised in the third category giving room to opening up data under the INSPIRE Directive.

scholarly journals A Comparative Study of the APEC Privacy Framework- A New Voice in the Data Protection Dialogue?

2008 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 1-44
Author(s):  
Johanna G. Tan
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
Free Flow Of Information ◽  
International Conventions ◽  
Flow Of Information ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThe dialogue on data protection has so far been dominated by European and American voices. There are currently a few international conventions in place such as the Council of Europe's 1981 Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard to the Automatic processing of personal data, the 1980 OECD Guidelines Governing the Protection of Privacy and Transborder Flows of Personal Data , which apply to 30 OECD countries, and the EU Directive 95/46/EC on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data, which binds EU member states but has had some impact on non-European countries due to the restriction on cross border flow of information.This has changed with the emergence of the APEC Privacy Framework in 2004 which focuses on the importance of the free flow of information in the digital age. Does the APEC Privacy Framework have anything of value to add or does it dilute the standards already in place? This article will examine these questions and argue that perhaps the APEC Privacy Framework is the first step towards a truly global standard for data protection.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document