1 / 16

41 st Asia Pacific Privacy Authorities (APPA) Forum –

41 st Asia Pacific Privacy Authorities (APPA) Forum – PHAEDRA Workshop Nr. 3: The EU Data Protection Regulation and regional perspectives on improving cooperation between DPAs, PCs and PEAs Overview of the legal reports under workstream 2 Gertjan Boulet

piercec
Download Presentation

41 st Asia Pacific Privacy Authorities (APPA) Forum –

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 41st Asia Pacific Privacy Authorities (APPA) Forum – PHAEDRA Workshop Nr. 3: The EU Data Protection Regulation and regional perspectives on improving cooperation between DPAs, PCs and PEAs Overview of the legal reports under workstream 2 Gertjan Boulet Wednesday, 18 June 2014, 13.20-15.20 Westin Chosun Hotel Seoul, 106 Sogong-ro, Jung-gu, Seoul

  2. Workstream 2: legislative review Report 2.1: “A Compass towards best Elements for Cooperation between Data Protection authorities” - 28 February 2014, updated 9 May 2014 Report 2.2: “Legal reflections for further improving cooperation between data protection authorities” - 9 May 2014

  3. Report 2.1 - Jurisdiction profiles • (non)-EU countries • Identification and review of • general data protection laws • enabling legislation: establishing and empowering DPAs and creating a legal basis for cooperation • Key findings in questionnaires, annual reports, press releases, websites

  4. Report 2.1 - Jurisdiction profiles Questionnaire, question 2 “What are the chief constraints on you in achieving more co-operation and better co-ordination? Please rank in order of importance, with 1 as most serious and 6 as least serious.”

  5. Report 2.1 - Jurisdiction profiles

  6. Report 2.1 - Jurisdiction profiles Observations • In general: just one or two articles on cooperation are sufficient to foster international cooperation. • BUT: which information can be shared? Confidential information, professional secrecy. • Problem expressed by Danish DPA: “the divergence in opinions on what's important and less important is more important than specific legal constraints.” • Lack of a harmonized EU DP legal framework, different national laws & enforcement priorities

  7. Report 2.1 - Networks between DPAs Binding networks • Cooperation in the Convention 108 and its additional protocol + modernisation • Cooperation under Directive 95/46/EC • Cooperation under proposal for a Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) • Intra-EU (Arts 54-68) • Outside EU (Art 45)

  8. OECD Central & Eastern European DPAs French-speaking Association of Personal Data Protection Authorities • APEC Ibero-American Data Protection Network Asia-Pacific Privacy Authorities International Conference Of Data Protection And Privacy Commissioners

  9. Report 2.1 - Agreements between DPAs • Memorandum of Cooperation, Cooperation Agreement, Collaboration Declaration, Declaration on Further Collaboration, Declaration of Intentions, Declaration on Joint Co-operation … • MoU between the DPA of Berlin and the Korea Information Security Agency (28 November 2002)

  10. Report 2.1 - Aims of cooperation Enforcement of privacy and data protection laws • coordination of policies in enforcement matters • coordination of enforcement methods • sanctions Mutual assistance between DPAs Raising awareness activities

  11. Report 2.1 – Forms of cooperation For variousaims of cooperation • Monitoring privacy and data protection laws in other countries • Sharing of standards and information • Trainings & staff exchanges • Projects between DPAs Enforcement cooperation • Mutual legal assistance • Parallel or joint investigations • Mutual recognition

  12. Report 2.2 - Reflections on instruments for cooperation between DPAs • Type of instrument: international treaty, MoU, ... • Scope: general or limited • Nature: binding or non-binding • Impact of level of harmonisation on the choice of the instrument ?

  13. Report 2.2 - Reflections on independence of DPAs • Article 16 Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union (EU) • Article 8 EU Charter of Fundamental Rights • Article 28(1) Directive 95/46/EC • Article 1(3) Additional Protocol to Convention 108 • §19(c) revised OECD Guidelines on the Protection of Privacy and Transborder Flows of Personal Data

  14. Report 2.2 - Reflections on independence of DPAs European Commission versus - Germany, 9 March 2010: GermanDPAssubject to oversight by the state - Austria, 6 October 2012:Federal Chancellor has an unconditional right to information covering all aspects of the work of the DPA - Hungary, 8 April 2014: bringing to an end the termserved by the Hungarian DPA beforeexpiry of the full term

  15. PHAEDRA project www.phaedra-project.eu

  16. Thank you! gertjan.boulet@vub.ac.be

More Related