Shaping the future of privacy
10 November 2010
This article was first published in Data Protection Law
& Policy in November 2010
After months of anticipation, weeks of gossip and leaked
strategy documents, the European Commission has finally and
publicly come out of the legislative policy closet. The publication
of the Commission’s approach for modernising the EU legal system
for the protection of personal data is a crucial milestone. In
fact, the potential impact of the Commission’s official
communication should not be underestimated. If it gets it right,
this will shape the future of privacy - a must-have value for
the information society. If it gets it wrong, not only will legal
compliance be compromised, but a fundamental right will end up
being very badly damaged.
Although they are only covered at a very high level, the
Commission seems to have correctly identified today’s data privacy
challenges. It is certainly encouraging to see a public
acknowledgement of the current framework’s failure to address the
issues raised by new technologies and globalisation. The big
question mark is whether the EU will be able to identify what is
realistically achievable and aim for that, rather than pursuing an
unrealistic data protection nirvana. When dealing with a
fundamental right there is a natural tendency to avoid compromises,
but in this case pragmatism should prevail.
The devil may be in the detail (which will come later in 2011
when a concrete legislative proposal is revealed), but so far the
signs are positive. In practical terms, the Commission’s strategy
for a future data protection regime rests on five pillars:
strengthening individuals’ rights, achieving harmonisation,
enhancing organisations’ responsibilities, addressing international
data transfers and strengthening enforcement. Overall, the balance
between tried and tested solutions and new ideas is good, but more
importantly, the essential ingredients for progressive personal
information protection are either specifically included in the
proposed strategy or suitably implied.
The most innovative features of the Commission’s approach to
21st century data privacy seem to fall within the individuals’
rights category. Whilst transparency is far from new in European
data protection law, the Commission hints at some new measures such
more specific multi-party information provision obligations and
standard privacy notices. Following from that, the Commission is
eager to explore controversial measures such as general personal
breach notification, data minimisation, the right to be forgotten
and data portability. Whether a meaningful and productive debate
about all of these ideas can take place in just a few months is
another matter, but the new framework could see the introduction of
measures that would go head to head against the direction adopted
by the digital economy so far.
An objective that is guaranteed to receive 100% support is the
harmonisation and simplification of rules. Administrative burdens
in particular, like registration and regulatory authorisation, are
due for a makeover and are likely to face a radical review.
However, a much more difficult question in terms of obtaining
universal agreement on will be the clarification of the criteria
for determining the applicable law. The Commission is aware of the
illogical consequences of applying the current establishment and
equipment rules in an online world and, at the same time, it is
keen to ensure that individuals are not deprived of protection. So
will it change direction entirely and go for jurisdictional rules
based on EU citizenship or residency?
The Commission provides a greater degree of certainty about its
intentions when it talks about the elements of the forthcoming
regime aimed at enhancing data controllers’ responsibility. The
emphasis here seems to be on practicalities - hence the
references to the role of privacy officers, the requirement to
carry out privacy impact assessments and the implementation of the
‘Privacy by Design’ principle. Equally practical is the position on
the rules for international data transfers. Whilst abandoning the
restrictions affecting unsafe data flows seems out of the question,
the specific references to the improvement of the current adequacy
mechanisms and the development of Binding Corporate Rules evidence
a recognition of the need for a fix.
In the end, the test for the future of European data protection
law lies on its ability to interface with other international data
privacy laws. More than ever and for the rest of human history,
privacy is a global issue. A European framework that is tolerant of
other regimes and can relate to personal information protection
initiatives developed in other parts of the world will be much more
effective and successful than an EU-centric one. If the EU is to
remain a driving force for the development and promotion of
international legal and technical standards for the protection of
personal data – as the Commission wishes - realism and
pragmatism, as well as imagination, should guide everyone’s
efforts. The opportunity is ours.