scholarly journals Government-to-Business (G2B) Research Data Sharing and the GDPR: Reconciling the 'Public' with the 'Private'?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stergios Aidinlis
Keyword(s):  
Data Processing ◽  
Data Sharing ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Public ◽  
Private Interests ◽  
The Eu

Governments across the EU are increasingly turning their attention to advanced big data analytics, aiming to use their data to inform the design and implementation of public policies. Due to limitations in expertise and resources, this is often impossible without the formation of data sharing partnerships with private actors. Yet, the prevailing view in EU data protection regulatory guidance is that the ‘public interest’ and private interests as lawful grounds for data processing under article 6 GDPR find themselves in a zero-sum relationship. The ‘public interest’ under article 6(1)(e) GDPR is construed as the exclusive realm of public authorities, which are often advised against relying on other grounds for processing, associated with private interests, such as ‘legitimate interests’ under article 6(1)(f) GDPR. This chapter argues against the presently dominant divide between public and private interests under lawful grounds for processing, sketching the emergence of Government-to-Business (G2B) research data sharing in the EU. A conceptualisation of the ‘public’ interest as not incompatible with private interests, as long as a contribution to societal well-being is made through data processing, is offered in that regard. The chapter elaborates on this conceptualisation and the requirements for ensuring protection of the fundamental rights of data subjects, while reflecting on the research questions that should concern future EU data protection law researchers with regard to its adoption.

The Fight against Terrorism, Fundamental Rights and the EU Courts: The Unsolved Conundrum

2012 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 269-295
Author(s):  
Eva Nanopoulos
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Relevant Information ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Public Security ◽  
The Public ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Conflicting Demands ◽  
The Eu

AbstractUsing the example of anti-terrorism measures, this chapter looks at the difficulties experienced by the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) in reconciling the conflicting demands of fundamental rights protection and public security. It shows that under the current arrangements, the CJEU cannot have regard to information which has not gone through a proper adversarial hearing, even in cases where disclosure of the relevant information will jeopardise the public interest. The chapter thus envisages the possibility for reform. It examines, in particular, the special advocate procedure and the sort of difficulties that its transposition in the EU context would give rise to.

scholarly journals The liberty of the moderns: Market freedom and democracy within the EU

2012 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 141-172 ◽  
Author(s):  
RICHARD BELLAMY
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Civil Liberties ◽  
Representative Democracy ◽  
The Political ◽  
Political Liberty ◽  
Free Markets ◽  
The Public ◽  
Private Interests ◽  
Logical Entailment ◽  
The Eu

AbstractTaking its cue from Benjamin Constant’s famous comparison of the liberty of the ancients with that of the moderns, this article examines the compatibility of democracy with free markets within the EU. Constant argued that commerce had replaced the political liberty of the ancients with the civil liberties of the moderns. Nevertheless, he contended a degree of political liberty remained necessary to guarantee these civil liberties. The difficulty was whether the political system could operate in the interest of all if modern citizens had ceased to identify with the public interest in the manner of the ancients and preferred to pursue their private interests. Constant believed representative democracy offered a form of political liberty that was compatible with modern liberty. It involved a less demanding view of civic virtue to ancient liberty and a different conception of the public interest as promoting rather than in conflict with private interests. However, for it to operate as Constant expected required certain social and cultural conditions that emerged in European nation states but are not themselves the products of commerce and may even be undermined by it: namely, a national identity; a social contract; and political parties. The EU involves a further deepening of modern commercial liberty beyond the nation state. This article explores three main issues raised by this development. First, have any of the three elements that facilitated the operation of representative democracy within the member states evolved at the EU level? Second, if not, is it possible to create an effective form of representative democracy on a post-national basis as the logical entailment of the liberties of the moderns? Third, if neither of these is possible, can we simply detach modern liberty from political liberty and see social rights as attributes of free movement, and efficient and equitable economic regulations as the products of technocratic governance? All three questions are answered in the negative.

scholarly journals Liberalization and Governance in the Geographical Distribution of Pharmacies in Spain

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 34
Author(s):  
Ángel Miramontes Carballada ◽  
Rubén C. Lois-González
Keyword(s):  
Nursing Care ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Health Tourism ◽  
The Public ◽  
Private Interests ◽  
Northern European ◽  
Health Infrastructure ◽  
Exhaustive Study ◽  
The Eu

The Health system in Spain is considered one of the most valued public services by the population. In fact, during the first decade of the 21st century, Spain became a health tourism destination for people from central and northern European countries. In addition to the health infrastructure, the quality of medical and nursing care stands out. Something similar also happens with the Spanish pharmaceutical system. However, there are some characteristics that should be addressed from a Geography perspective. The pharmacies’ legal system does not consider them to be of public interest. One is when some of the main activities are the sale and distribution of medicines that are partially paid for by the Administration, that is, Social Security. In the same activity, the public function is combined with the private interests of the pharmacy owners to provide a balanced territorial service. One of the conclusions demonstrates how the borders that are sometimes created by the Administration are not always the most efficient in relation to the characteristics of the territory, nor do they provide the best service to the population and, therefore, create territorial imbalances within a country. To reach our conclusions, we carried out an exhaustive study of the pharmacy legislation in the EU and in Spain, as well as Geography of Health and theories of territorial location. We combined this information with statistics on the territorial characteristics of Spain. This allowed us to confirm the peculiarities that exist within the governance of the distribution of pharmacy offices in Spain.

The Right to Be Forgotten: The Balance Between Public and Private Interests in the Practice of Constitutional Control Organs

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 41-48
Author(s):  
Daria A. Petrova ◽  
Ekaterina A. Galchun
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
Private Interests ◽  
Right To Be Forgotten ◽  
Telecommunications Network ◽  
Internet Information ◽  
The Right

The internet information and telecommunications network, due to its accessibility and easy storage and distribution of huge amounts of data, and its ability to search and find information, plays a key role in the implementation of such fundamental rights as freedom of speech and the press. At the same time, there is an increasing risk that materials on the World Wide Web may harm the rights and legitimate interests of individuals, especially the right to privacy. In these conditions of eternal competition between the public and the private, the right to be forgotten arises as a mechanism that allows one to remove or slow the spread of unwanted information. The authors investigate the problem of implementing this relatively new opportunity in the context of finding a balance between the public interest in obtaining information and the private interest in destroying it. It is argued that this category of cases is difficult due to the lack of a unified standard of proof and criteria for evaluating arguments. Based on an analysis of the most important precedents, the most common legal positions on the issue are identified and critically assessed. An increasing priority afforded to public interest and the decreasing requirements for the deletion of information is revealed. The authors consider the emergence of the right to be forgotten as a new mechanism for settling disputes in a pre-trial manner, by allowing one to not completely destroy, but to suspend the dissemination of undesirable information, thereby protecting private interests without violating the legitimate rights of the public. The conclusion is made about the right to be forgotten as a compromise in the conflict of fundamental rights. An approximate list of arguments for applicants and respondents is provided, suitable for practical application in disputes about the right to be forgotten.

scholarly journals Biobank and Biomedical Research: Responsibilities of Controllers and Processors Under the EU General Data Protection Regulation

2021 ◽  
pp. 61-89
Author(s):  
Ana Nordberg
Keyword(s):  
Biomedical Research ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
Historical Research ◽  
General Data Protection Regulation ◽  
The Public ◽  
General Data ◽  
The Eu

AbstractBiobanks are essential infrastructures in current health and biomedical research. Advanced scientific research increasingly relies on processing and correlating large amounts of genetic, clinical and behavioural data. These data are particularly sensitive in nature and the risk of privacy invasion and misuse is high. The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) developed and increased harmonisation, resulting in a framework in which the specific duties and obligations of entities processing personal data—controllers and processors—were defined. Biobanks, in the exercise of their functions, assume the role of controllers and/or processors and as such need to comply with a number of complex rules. This chapter analyses these rules in the light of Article 89 GDPR, which creates safeguards and derogations relating to ‘processing for archiving purposes in the public interest, scientific or historical research purposes or statistical purposes’. It identifies key compliance challenges faced by biobanks as data controllers and processors, such as determining whether the GDPR is applicable and its intersection with other regulations; when a biobank should be considered controller and processor; and what are the main duties of biobanks as data controllers and processors and options for compliance.

The Anonymisation of Research Data — A Pyric Victory for Privacy that Should Not Be Pushed Too Hard by the eu Data Protection Framework?

2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 347-367 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Quinn
Keyword(s):  
Data Protection ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Health Data ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Personal Health ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Health Records ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Eu

Abstract Personal health data is essential to many forms of scientific research. Such data may come from a large variety of sources including electronic health records (ehrs), datasets used for previous research and from data linked to biobanks. European data protection law recognises that in addition to using consent as a legal basis for the processing of personal health data for scientific research, such data may be used without consent where it is in the ‘public interest’. Despite the existence of such a legal option, ethics bodies in a number of states have shown reticence to utilise it, often pushing researchers into either obtaining consent or anonymising the data in question. Whilst the latter option may be appealing from a legal point of view, if carried out properly, the result may be that the research value of the data is reduced or even destroyed.

Enforcing European Competition Law through Leniency Programmes in the Light of Fundamental Rights

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Salemme
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Current Level ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Public ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Leniency Programme ◽  
Opening Up ◽  
European Competition Law ◽  
The Eu

The entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty has increased the importance of fundamental rights, attributing the same legal value to the CFR as the EU treaties, and opening up the possibility of the EU’s accession to the ECHR. In this context, this book analyses whether the current level of fundamental rights protection in leniency procedures falls within the parameters of accepted ECHR standards. This book demonstrates that the leniency procedure is not fully compatible with fundamental rights and general principles, and proposes a new programme, which can reconcile the public interest in an effective and efficient leniency programme with the protection of the fundamental rights of the parties involved in the procedure.

scholarly journals Legal and political aspects of avoiding the conflict of interests

2006 ◽  
Vol 78 (9) ◽  
pp. 97-111
Author(s):  
Slobodan Beljanski
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Conflict Of Interest ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Access To Information ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Conflict Of Interests ◽  
The Public ◽  
Private Interests ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Paper Author

In the paper author analyzes normative, political and social suppositions for the prevention of conflict of interests. The reason is the first Serbian Law for the Prevention of Conflict of Interest passed on April 20th 2004. and the practice of the Republic Committee for Deciding on the Conflict of Interests which acts from 18. January 2005. Author considers that in the same way the conflict between public and private interests is relevant as well as the conflict inside public interest, where the cumulation of functions can endangered the public well-being, founded on the goal that every public function must be performed professionally, conscientiously and responsibly. In that regard permissible exceptions destroy the moral base of reserved prohibitions and discredited the pure idea of prevention of conflicts. Similar effect is created by declarative character of sanctions which can be given to officials, ambivalent relation to the access to information about the property of officials and insufficient resolution that the privacy of officials must be treated very restrictively.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document