Nov 62015

European Parliament Adopts Surveillance Resolution Aimed at Mass Surveillance and Prompting Progress on Safe Harbor 2.0

William RM Long, Francesca Blythe and Colleen Theresa Brown
, , , , , ,

On October 29, 2015, the European Parliament adopted a resolution on the electronic mass surveillance of EU citizens (the “Resolution”). Positioned as a follow-up to its resolution of 12 March 2014 in which the Parliament called for the immediate suspension of Safe Harbor and put forward a number of recommendations to limit access to personal data of European citizens as part of mass surveillance, the Resolution calls on the European Commission to “reflect immediately on alternatives to Safe Harbor and on the impact of the judgment [from the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Schrems case] on any other instruments for the transfer of personal data to the U.S.” It also calls for the European Commission to “report on the matter by the end of 2015.” In addition, the European Parliament demanded that the Commission urgently provide an update on the ongoing negotiations between US authorities and the Commission.

Some of the additional key points raised in the Resolution include the Parliament:

  • expressing disappointment in the “overall lack of sense of urgency and willingness” by the Commission and EU Member States to address those recommendations set out in Parliament’s 2014 resolution and calls on the Commission to act on these recommendations by December 2015 at the latest;
  • calling on EU Member States to drop any criminal charges against Edward Snowden and grant him protection in recognition of his status as a whistleblower;
  • condemning some of the recent EU Member State laws that extend surveillance capabilities of intelligence bodies, including, for example, the UK’s Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014;
  • welcoming the efforts by the US to “rebuild trust through the umbrella agreement” and the passing of the Judicial Redress Act of 2015 but urges the Commission to “assess in detail precisely [and report on], how the umbrella agreement would interact with…the EU legal framework for data protection”; and
  • considering that the fundamental rights of EU citizens “remain in danger and that too little has been done to ensure their full protection in case of electronic mass surveillance”.

On the U.S. side, the Judicial Redress Act, which would permit foreign citizens of certain countries to bring civil actions under the Privacy Act of 1974 and facilitate the Umbrella Agreement, passed the House of Representatives on October 20, 2015. It is now under consideration in the Senate, where it is currently pending in the Senate Committee on the Judiciary.

William RM Long

London

wlong@sidley.com

Francesca Blythe

London

fblythe@sidley.com

Colleen Theresa Brown

Washington, D.C.

cbrown@sidley.com

You might also like
UK Sets Out It’s “Pro-Innovation” Approach To AI Regulation

On 29 March 2023, the UK’s Department for Science Innovation and Technology (“DSIT”) published its long awaited White Paper on its “pro-innovation approach to AI regulation” (the “White Paper”), along with a corresponding impact assessment. The White Paper builds on the “proportionate, light touch and forward-looking” approach to AI regulation set out in the policy paper published in July 2022. Importantly, the UK has decided to take a different approach to regulating AI compared to the EU, opting for a decentralised sector-specific approach, with no new legislation expected at this time. Instead, the UK will regulate AI primarily through sector-specific, principles based guidance and existing laws, with an emphasis on an agile and innovation-friendly approach. This is in significant contrast to the EU’s proposed AI Act which is a standalone piece of horizontal legislation regulating all AI systems, irrespective of industry.

How the China Personal Information Protection Law Applies to Foreign Asset Managers

Since China’s Personal Information Protection Law (PIPL) came into effect in November 2021, there has been widespread uncertainty amongst offshore fund managers and investors with entities outside Mainland China as to how and whether the regime applies to them. Given the potential for foreign asset managers to overlook or misinterpret PIPL, this brief update outlines some guidance as to how PIPL can apply, and to whom, in a practical context.

EU Moving Closer to an AI Act – Key Areas of Impact for Life Sciences/MedTech Companies

The European Union is moving closer to adopting the first major legislation to horizontally regulate artificial intelligence. Today, the European Parliament (Parliament) reached a provisional agreement on its internal position on the draft Artificial Intelligence Regulation (AI Act). The text will be adopted by Parliament committees in the coming weeks and by the Parliament plenary in June. The plenary adoption will trigger the next legislative step of trilogue negotiations with the European Council to agree on a final text. Once adopted, according to the text, the AI Act will become applicable 24 months after its entry into force (or 36 months according to the Council’s position), which is currently expected in the second half of 2025, at the earliest.