Experts criticize the law for data exchange between EU investigators

Experts criticize the law for data exchange between EU investigators
Experts were largely in a hearing in the Bundestag agreed that the transfer of information between European law enforcement authorities can not be relieved without extensive further requirements. It consists in the EU is not uniform and adequate level of data protection, several experts stressed on Monday in Berlin. Individual police forces to be examined even if private information were kept in other Member States according to local safety standards, be unrealistic. "We know little about the situation around in Malta and Hungary," noted criminal lawyer of Berlin Klaus Hoffmann-Holland.
The federal government has submitted a bill in March, by which a part of the EU Council decision is to be implemented from 2006. Law enforcement authorities of another Member State should be granted under the same conditions as national access to existing information. Reasons for withholding information see the Cabinet due to "discrimination" of other EU countries are few. This could be due, for instance, that national security interests of the affected Member State requests for information, an ongoing investigation or would endanger the safety of persons. Requests for information transfer is in urgent cases within eight Sunden, have to be regularly within a week and a maximum processed within two weeks.
The data is meant to convey as planned, which would "massively into the right to informational self-determination" intervened, warning the Passau criminal lawyer spar Putzke. The protection of fundamental rights within the EU, however, could not be guaranteed. Nobody knows what happens to the information eventually. The meaningful in itself an effective transnational law enforcement efforts were therefore at the moment "at a huge cost of data protection" of EU citizens. There existed, therefore, "substantial doubt" whether the design satisfies constitutional requirements.
The legislature would have to write at least Putzke According to his satisfaction that the level of data protection in other EU countries would be appropriate. Although it should not black list "data protection rogue states" provide that a transfer could also be some strings attached, whether the recipient country would violate fundamental rights. Putzke did not think much of the approach put forward by other experts, namely first the EU Framework Decision on data protection in the security field into national law or to make such release of information about whether the Framework Decision was implemented. This leads only to frustration, since you do not states with a high level of protection could commit to implementation.
Even if countries could not be placed on a blacklist, then at least some authorities, said the Berlin Öffentlichkeitsrechtler Hartmut Aden. It spoke, however, good reasons why the "antiquated and inadequate partly formulated framework decision" to transfer data at present not to adapt. This would "completely inconsequential" because the EU and the Lisbon Treaty now stands on a different legal basis. It is therefore better to await a revised EU requirements, which must then also at the EU Parliament to be involved. It must be the source of the data can be marked to make this right or to delete. Likely to go too far and that information also migrate to third countries if these are only a "guarantee" abgäben to treat them appropriately.
The Federal Data Protection Commissioner Peter Schaar and Barbara Körffer by the Independent Centre for Privacy Protection Schleswig-Holstein (ULD), noted that even the Framework Decision on the protection of privacy in law enforcement was inadequate and leave gaps. It is therefore problematic, the EU-wide information exchange according to the contract criticized by civil rights principle of availability release. The draft contained many "design require 'terms, complained further troop. Acceptances must provide data with a clear purpose, the limited number of authorities entitled to consult and prohibiting their use for a use for security to be installed.
The vice president of the Federal Criminal Police (BKA), Jürgen Stock, praised the proposed scheme, however as a "milestone". It is "an expression of commonly agreed will, in the sense of citizens in Europe to combat crime effectively and efficiently." Likely to use the data that the prosecutors 'discretion' or release, was "nothing new". The BKA brash already know this and therefore data protection standards in other countries. Stock showed general satisfaction that "our concerns and those of the country's police forces are taken into account".