American Intelligence To Access Your Bank Accounts, Travel Plans, Salaries

[Sub-X]

American Intelligence To Access Your Bank Accounts, Travel Plans, Salaries
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jun/30/eu.privacy
30 June 2008

New pact would give EU citizens’ data to US

A comprehensive transatlantic pact clearing the way for the unprecedented supply of private data on European citizens to the American authorities is to be promoted by France in support of the US-driven campaign to combat terrorism and transnational crime.

The French government is expected to use its six-month presidency of the EU, starting tomorrow, to build on 18 months of confidential negotiations between Washington and Brussels aimed at clearing the complex legal obstacles to the exchange of personal information with the Americans.

The controversial proposed pact, a "framework agreement" on common data protection principles, is likely to enable the Americans to access the credit card histories, banking details and travel habits of Europeans, although senior officials in Brussels deny US reports that the Americans will also be able to snoop on the internet browsing records of Europeans.

"Everybody's keen on this and sees the benefit of it. The French are very keen to continue the work," said a senior official in Brussels. "There's all sorts of information stored on computers nowadays that may be of interest to law enforcement agencies. If we reach agreement, we may well contemplate turning it into a binding international agreement."

The Americans want to seal the accord this year, while George Bush is still in the White House. But the European commission, running the negotiations along with EU member states, believes a quick deal is unlikely and that its conclusion will hinge on the energy with which the incoming US administration tackles the subject.

The negotiations, being conducted by a "high-level contact group" of European and US department of homeland security officials, have been led for the past 18 months by Stewart Baker on the US side and Jonathan Faull, a Briton responsible for justice and home affairs in the commission.

The US drive to gain access to the private data of Europeans is the latest episode in a systematic American campaign.

Under separate agreements being negotiated, Washington is insisting on having armed guards on flights from Europe to the US, is introducing a new electronic travel authorisation system where travellers to the US would need to apply online for permission to fly before buying a ticket, and last year the EU yielded to American pressure to supply the US authorities with 19 pieces of information on passengers flying from Europe to America.

Washington is using its visa-waiver system, making travel to the US visa-free for most European countries, to force EU states to comply with its demands.

"This is outrageous," said Sophie In't Veld, a Dutch Liberal MEP on the European parliament's civil liberties committee. "This is about fundamental rights. But it has all been done in secret by civil servants behind closed doors."

The two sides are said to have reached agreement on about a dozen areas, but a big sticking point remains legal redress for Europeans who feel they are being victimised by US possession of information that may be incorrect or used incorrectly.

[Kregener]

Welcome to our world...world.

[Kilika]

Knowing how these clowns operate, there must be buried somewhere in that "agreement" provisions for reciprocity!

[Sub-X]

EU and US near deal on confidential data sharing
http://euobserver.com/9/26416
30 June 2008

The European Union and the US are near to agreeing a "binding international agreement" which would make it easier for law enforcement authorities on both sides of the Atlantic to inspect personal data such as credit card transactions, travel histories and internet browsing habits.

The New York Times cited on Saturday (28 June) an internal report by the US Homeland Security, Justice and State Departments as well as European negotiators. The report says that it will be lawful for governments and companies to mutually exchange personal information as part of the global fight against terrorism.
 
Information on race, religion, political opinion, health or sexual life should not be used, however "unless domestic law provides appropriate safeguards." But the document stops short of specifying what appropriate safeguards are.

According to the New York Times, negotiators continue to wrangle over issues linked to privacy protection. For example, they need to agree whether European citizens could file a lawsuit against the US government if they think their personal data have been mishandled.

The EU is sticking to the position that all Europeans "require the ability to bring suit in US courts specifically under the Privacy Act for an agreement to be reached on redress," the New York Times reports.

The 1974 Privacy Act allows American citizens and permanent residents to challenge the state, but this right does not apply to foreigners.

The EU and the US are trying to find a "common ground on privacy" and to agree "non-conflicting obligations on private companies," Stewart A. Baker from the Department of Homeland Security was cited as saying by the American newspaper.

The 9-11 trigger

The EU-US talks were triggered by 2001 terrorist attacks on US soil. Back then, Washington found it difficult to freely obtain data on European air passengers flying to the US as well as information on European financial transactions operated by Belgian-based consortium SWIFT.

During the last EU-US summit under the Slovene EU presidency (9-10 June), the two sides agreed that "the fight against transnational crime and terrorism requires the ability to share personal data for law enforcement."

They reiterated the need for having a "binding international agreement", which would lower barriers for data exchange, while guaranteeing that the right to privacy is "fully" protected.

However, criticism is likely to come from the European Parliament, a strong advocate of citizens' rights.

"I am very worried that once this will be adopted, it will serve as a pretext to freely share our personal data with anyone, so I want it to be very clear about exactly what it means and how it will work," Dutch liberal Sophia in't Veld told the New York Times.

[Sub-X]

EU hopes to secure data protection deal with US next year
http://euobserver.com/9/26435
3 July 2008

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - The European Union and the US continue to wrangle over how best to protect personal data exchanged between law enforcement authorities on both sides of the Atlantic as part of the War on Terror and the struggle against transnational crime.

"Painstaking" and "difficult" talks lie ahead, Jonathan Faull, the head of the European Commission's justice and home affairs department, told journalists on Wednesday (2 July).
 
According to the official, the two sides have reached "a certain measure of common agreement on principles". "We are 70-80 percent of the way there," Mr Faull said about nearly 18-month-long, closed-door negotiations.

European data protection rules are "very different" from those applied in the US. So far, negotiators have been able to tease out twelve "personal data protection requirements" such as purpose specification, sensitive data, independent oversight or redress.

"The Americans had to be convinced one by one of the importance of these principles and the need to agree to them," the commission's Jonathan Faull said, adding: "Why are the Americans doing that? Because they have an interest in sharing data."

Main sticking points

But the devil lies in the detail, and the two sides are yet to agree the scope of the application of these basic principles.

"It is not hard to say that the duration of retention of data should be the shortest possible ... that 's fine as a principle. What people need to know and want to know is how long," Mr Faull said.

According to him, the purpose for which the state requires personal data "must be specified and limited". Sensitive information such as health "should not be processed and if so, only in very exceptional circumstances with appropriate safeguards".

If law enforcement authorities are looking for a terrorism suspect, who is known to be a diabetic, then it might be "reasonable" for those authorities to request a sensitive piece of information on health, so they can check it against another database, Mr Faull said. Otherwise, airlines "should destroy" the information once the food was served and the purpose for which the information was provided expired.

Currently, the main sticking point is "redress", meaning whether European citizens could file a lawsuit against the US government. The 1974 Privacy Act allows American citizens and permanent residents to challenge the state, but this right does not apply to foreigners.

"It seems to us very important that the Europeans should have in the US courts the same rights of action as the Americans have in our courts when they believe that their data protection rights were infringed," Mr Faull said.

Divisions also remain concerning companies that could find themselves caught up in a possible conflict between EU and US law. In addition, relations with countries beyond the US that may receive access to data that cross the Atlantic need to be sorted out.

"We want to be sure that wherever our data end up they get proper level of protection," Mr Faull said, adding that the issue is particularly important vis-a-vis Canada.

What's next?

The EU's executive body hopes to have a legally binding international deal "sometime next year".

"Once we determine that an agreement is really possible ... we will seek a necessary mandate from the council [representing EU governments] and there will be formal international negotiation with the view to concluding binding international agreement between the EU and the US," Mr Faull said.

The current EU treaty allows for more speedy negotiations as justice and home affairs matters lie in hands of the member states. Under the Lisbon Treaty, arrangements would be different, meaning the European Parliament would gain an equal say in the process.