Book•
Information Sharing and Data Protection in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice: Towards Harmonised Data Protection Principles for Information Exchange at EU-level
12 Nov 2011-
TL;DR: The AFSJ Actors in the Light of the European Data Protection Standard and Perspectives and Suggestions for Improvement are suggested.
Abstract: Introduction.- Data Protection Standard in the AFSJ.- AFSJ Actors in the Light of the European Data Protection Standard.- Cooperation and Data Exchange of the AFSJ Actors and Their Compliance with the European Data Protection Standard.- Perspectives and Suggestions for Improvement.- Concluding Remarks.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors argue that, in making their way to safe spaces, refugees rely not only on a physical but also on an exponential number of migrants crossing the borders of Europe.
Abstract: Since 2014, millions of refugees and migrants have arrived at the borders of Europe. This article argues that, in making their way to safe spaces, refugees rely not only on a physical but increasin...
95 citations
Cites background from "Information Sharing and Data Protec..."
...…each individual EU member state “to check whether an alien found illegally present on its territory has applied for asylum in another Member State” (Council Regulation [EC] No 2725/2000, p. 3) and, thus, to prevent asylum seekers from filing multiple asylum applications (Boehm, 2012, p. 305)....
[...]
Dissertation•
01 Jan 2017
TL;DR: This chapter discusses major Interferences with data privacy for national security reasons pre-9/11 in the context of the data privacy/national security balance, with emphasis on the background and role of the NSA.
Abstract: ...................................................................................................................... iii Summary ..................................................................................................................... ix Overall Introduction.................................................................................................... 1 Chapter One ................................................................................................................. 7 The Privacy/National Security Balance from a European Perspective .................. 7 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 7 Section I: The Council of Europe ............................................................................ 13 1.0 The Basis for the Data Privacy/National Security Balance .......................... 13 2.0 The Influence of the ECHR on National Legal Systems .............................. 14 3.0 The Jurisprudence of the ECtHR and the Data Privacy/National Security Balance ................................................................................................................. 27 4.0 Shortcomings in the Jurisprudence of the ECtHR The Application of the Margin of Appreciation ........................................................................................ 43 Section II: The European Union .............................................................................. 67 1.0 The European Union and Human Rights Protection in the Context of the data privacy/national security balance ......................................................................... 73 2.0 The Growing Involvement of the EU in Human Rights Protection, particularly in data protection and the circumstances influencing this. ............... 77 3.0 Data Retention Directive 2006/24/EC and the Alteration of the Data Privacy/National Security Balance ....................................................................... 79 4.0 Features of Directive 2006/24/EC ................................................................ 81 5.0 Responses to Data Retention Directive 2006/24/EC .................................... 82 6.0 Institutional Responses to Directive 2006/24/EC......................................... 94 7.0 Judgment of the CJEU (Grand Chamber) on the Validity of Directive 2006/24/EC......................................................................................................... 103 8.0 The Ruling of the CJEU ............................................................................. 105 9.0 Significance of the Digital Rights Ireland and Seitlinger Judgment and its Context ............................................................................................................... 109 10.0 Consequences of the Digital Rights Ireland Judgment for Data Privacy/National Security in Europe .................................................................. 114 11.0 Judgments of the CJEU in the Google Spain and Schrems Cases .............. 122 12.0 Developments following the Invalidation of the Safe Harbour Agreement 131 13.0 Impact of the CJEU decisions in the Digital Rights Ireland, Google Spain, and Schrems cases on the data privacy/national security balance ...................... 135 14.0 The Alternative Data Privacy/National Security Balance: Circumventing vi Data Privacy Protections in the EU: The Mass Surveillance of Personal Data by Spy Agencies in some EU Member States ..........................................................135 15.0 Two Parallel Systems of Surveillance .........................................................146 16.0 The Council of Europe Versus The European Union: Which Regime Provides Greater Protection For Data Privacy Rights? .......................................148 17.0 Contrasting the European and U.S. positions on the Balancing of Data Privacy Rights against National Security Interests .............................................153 18.0 Conclusion ...................................................................................................156 Chapter Two .............................................................................................................165 The Privacy/Security Balance in the U.S. pre-9/11 ................................................165 1.0 Introduction .................................................................................................165 2.0 U.S. Understandings of the Right to Privacy and Particularly Data Privacy .............................................................................................................................168 3.0 Major Interferences with data privacy for national security reasons pre-9/11 in the context of the data privacy/national security balance, with emphasis on the background and role of the NSA. ........................................................................179 4.0 Major Scandals Relating to Data Retention: Privacy Rights Illegally Infringed by the Executive and its Agencies .......................................................186 5.0 Church Committee Report and the Balance Between National Security and Personal Liberties Pre-9/11 .................................................................................191 6.0 Judicial Oversight of Surveillance in the name of National Security: Implications for the Data Privacy/National Security Balance. ............................194 7.0 FISA: Adjusting the Data Privacy/National Security Balance? Restricting the Interpretation of Personal Data in the Context of Intelligence Surveillance by the Executive Branch in the name of National Security ...........................................197 8.0 Balancing Rights which are Qualitatively Different: Philosophical Issues Underlying the Data Privacy/National Security Balancing Paradigm ................209 9.0 Two Data Privacy/National Security Balancing Systems Pre-9/11:The Influence of NSA Surveillance Activity. The Legal and the Actual Balances....220 10.0 Conclusion ...................................................................................................224 Chapter Three ...........................................................................................................229 The Privacy/Security Balance in the U.S. Post-9/11 ..............................................229 1.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................229 2.0 Background ...................................................................................................230 3.0 The Administration's Defence of Its Surveillance Policies and a Scholarly Response .............................................................................................................244 4.0 Ideological Context of the Patriot Act ...........................................................252 5.0 Provisions of the Patriot Act .........................................................................253
58 citations
TL;DR: This dissertation addresses some of the data protection challenges that have arisen from globalization, technological progress, terrorism and seamless cross-border flows of personal data.
Abstract: This dissertation addresses some of the data protection challenges that have arisen from globalization, technological progress, terrorism and seamless cross-border flows of personal data. The focu ...
42 citations
Dissertation•
30 Jul 2017
27 citations
Cites background from "Information Sharing and Data Protec..."
...457 Böhm, F. (2012), op. cit. 458 See for instance in the case of the Data Retention Directive. (459) Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA of 27 November 2008 on the protection of personal data processed in the framework of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, OJ 2008 L350/60. 460 De Hert, P. and Papakonstantinou, V. (2015) Data Protection: The EU Institutions’ Battle over Data Processing vs....
[...]
...Böhm, F. (2011). Information Sharing and Data Protection in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice: Towards Harmonised Data Protection Principles for Information Exchange at EU-level....
[...]
TL;DR: The article concludes by proposing the notion of Relational Law to summarize the ethical dimension of SWRM, and compares existing principles in privacy by design, linked open data, legal information institutes, and online dispute resolution.
Abstract: The notion of validity fulfils a crucial role in legal theory. In the emerging Web 3.0, Semantic Web languages, legal ontologies, and normative multi-agent systems (nMAS) are designed to cover new regulatory needs. Conceptual models for complex regulatory systems shape the characteristic features of rules, norms, and principles in different ways. This article outlines one of such multilayered governance models, designed for the CAPER platform, and offers a definition of Semantic Web Regulatory Models (SWRM). It distinguishes between normative-SWRM and institutional-SWRM. It also compares existing principles in privacy by design, linked open data (LOD), legal information institutes (LII), and online dispute resolution (ODR). The article concludes by proposing the notion of Relational Law to summarize the ethical dimension of SWRM. Ethics are the only regulatory way to constitute a global space, out of the jurisdictional public domain set by national, international, or transnational law, and opposed to the private one.
21 citations