Wednesday

17th Jan 2018

Commission data protection reforms under fire

  • Reding: 'It is understandable to me that certain lobbyists from powerful multinationals are not very keen on delegated acts' (Photo: ec.europa.eu)

EU justice commissioner Viviane Reding Thursday (3 May) rejected criticism that certain provisions within her draft proposal on data protection rules could amount to a power-grab by the European Commission.

She was forced onto the defensive after a high-level expert committee in March said the commission would be making too many changes to current data protection rules without proper oversight - potentially leading to legal uncertainty.

Thank you for reading EUobserver!

Subscribe now for a 30 day free trial.

  1. €150 per year
  2. or €15 per month
  3. Cancel anytime

EUobserver is an independent, not-for-profit news organization that publishes daily news reports, analysis, and investigations from Brussels and the EU member states. We are an indispensable news source for anyone who wants to know what is going on in the EU.

We are mainly funded by advertising and subscription revenues. As advertising revenues are falling fast, we depend on subscription revenues to support our journalism.

For group, corporate or student subscriptions, please contact us. See also our full Terms of Use.

If you already have an account click here to login.

“The Working Party has serious reservations with regard to the extent the commission is empowered to adopt delegated and implementing acts, which is especially relevant because a fundamental right is at stake,” the Article 29 Data Protection Working Party said at the time.

Such acts, introduced in the 2009 Treaty of Lisbon, allow the commission to make minor changes to the law without affecting its core. Both the European parliament and council - representing member states - maintain some oversight over any such changes.

Specifically, a delegated act supplements or amends so-called non-essential elements of EU legislation while an implementing act, proposes uniform conditions for its implementation.

The working party pointed out that in Reding’s regulation a number of issues including data breach notification and mutual assistance could only be applied using such acts. And the use of them are at the commission’s discretion.

“The adoption of delegated or implementing acts for a large numbers of articles may take several years and could represent legal uncertainty," it said.

But Reding countered the working party position on Thursday by stating that delegated acts have essentially ended “the secretive way of technical legislation” drafted by bureaucratic committees behind closed doors.

Both parliament and council must explicitly agree to the acts in the text of the legislation, the commissioner pointed out.

“It is understandable to me that certain lobbyists from powerful multinationals are not very keen on delegated acts,” said Reding.

She added: “It is much easier to influence a handful of national experts in national ministries in a meeting behind closed doors than to change the view of 754 directly elected European Parliamentarians.”

A spokesperson from the European Parliament’s legal affairs committee agreed that such acts increase the transparency of the EU legislative process.

But detractors, like Vicky Marissen who is managing director at Pact European Affairs, a Brussels-based consultancy specialising in EU decision-making procedures, also claims the acts give the commission too much power.

Marissen, who co-authored and contributed to two books on comitology with Daniel Gueguen, argues that discussions on delegated and implementing acts should involve people who have to implement the laws, including member states’ authorities and businesses.

She argues that neither the parliament or council would really be able to amend the delegated acts outlined in Reding’s proposal on data protection reform.

“Great autonomy is given to the European commission which not only proposes the delegated acts but also adopts them. The European parliament and the council can veto it but under strict conditions. The parliament requires an absolute majority while the council requires a qualified majority," noted Marissen.

MEPs target exports of cyber surveillance tech

MEPs have introduced a human rights clause into the export of cyber surveillance technology as part of EU-wide reforms to prevent abuse by autocratic regimes. The Strasbourg plenary will vote on the bill on Wednesday.

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. AJC Transatlantic InstituteAJC Calls on EU to Sanction Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, Expel Ambassadors
  2. Dialogue PlatformRoundtable on "Political Islam, Civil Islam and The West" 31 January
  3. ILGA EuropeFreedom of Movement and Same-Sex Couples in Romania – Case Update!
  4. EU2017EEEstonia Completes First EU Presidency, Introduced New Topics to the Agenda
  5. Bio-Based IndustriesLeading the Transition Towards a Post-Petroleum Society
  6. ACCAWelcomes the Start of the New Bulgarian Presidency
  7. Mission of China to the EUPremier Li and President Tusk Stress Importance of Ties at ASEM Summit
  8. EU2017EEVAT on Electronic Commerce: New Rules Adopted
  9. European Jewish CongressChair of EU Parliament Working Group on Antisemitism Condemns Wave of Attacks
  10. Counter BalanceA New Study Challenges the Infrastructure Mega Corridors Agenda
  11. Dialogue PlatformThe Gülen Community: Who to Believe - Politicians or Actions?" by Thomas Michel
  12. Plastics Recyclers Europe65% Plastics Recycling Rate Attainable by 2025 New Study Shows