Warlord
06-12-2013, 02:13 AM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/79/Bundesarchiv_Bild_183-S72707,_Heinrich_Himmler.jpg/245px-Bundesarchiv_Bild_183-S72707,_Heinrich_Himmler.jpg
Eric Holder Jr
The European commission has sent US attorney general Eric Holder Jr a letter demanding explanations for American data snooping.
European Union officials have demanded "swift and concrete answers" to their requests for assurances from the US that its mass data surveillance programmes do not breach the fundamental privacy rights of European citizens.
The European commission's vice-president, Viviane Reding, has sent a letter with seven detailed questions to the US attorney general, Eric Holder Jr, demanding explanations about Prism and other American data snooping programmes.
Reding warns him that "given the gravity of the situation and the serious concerns expressed in public opinion on this side of the Atlantic" she expects detailed answers before they meet at an EU-US justice ministers' meeting in Dublin on Friday.
She also warns Holder that people's trust that the rule of law will be respected – including a high level of privacy protection for both US and EU citizens – is essential to the growth of the digital economy, including transatlantic business and the nature of the US response could affect the whole transatlantic relationship.
In the letter, released to the Guardian, Reding details her serious concerns that the Americans are "accessing and processing, on a large scale, the data of EU citizens using major US online service providers". She says programmes such as Prism, and the laws that authorise them, could have "grave adverse consequences for the fundamental rights of EU citizens".
The EU's action came as the first constitutional challenge in the US to the widespread surveillance of American citizens was laid down. In a lawsuit filed in New York, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) accused the US government of a process that was "akin to snatching every American's address book".
The ACLU's lawsuit claimed the National Security Agency's acquisition of phone records of millions of Verizon users violated the first and fourth amendments, which guarantee citizens' right to association, speech and to be free of unreasonable searches and seizures.
EU officials have repeatedly raised with the Americans the scope of legislation such as the Patriot Act which can lead to European companies being required to transfer data to the US in breach of EU and national law. The commission's vice-president and justice commissioner says the exchange of data for law enforcement purposes must take place to the greatest possible extent through established formal channels.
"Direct access of US law enforcement to the data of EU citizens on servers of US companies should be excluded unless in clearly defined, exceptional and judicially reviewable situations," writes Reding.
Reding laid out the seven questions she said needed to be answered:
• Are Prism and other similar programmes aimed only at the data of US citizens and residents, or also – even primarily – at non-US nationals, including EU citizens?
• Is access to, collection of or processing of data on the basis of Prism and other programmes … limited to specific and individual cases, and if so what criteria are applied?
• Is the data of individuals accessed, collected or processed in bulk (or on a very wide scale, without justification relating to specific individual cases) either regularly or occasionally?
• Is the scope of these programmes restricted to national security or foreign intelligence or is it broader?
• What avenues, judicial or administrative, are available to companies in the US or the EU to challenge access to, collection of and processing of data under Prism or other programmes?
• What avenues are available to EU citizens to be told if they are affected by Prism or other similar programmes and how do they compare with those available to US citizens?
• What avenues are available to EU citizens or companies to challenge access to, collection of and processing of their personal data under Prism and similar programmes, and how does that compare with the rights of US citizens?
More:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/11/europe-us-privacy
Eric Holder Jr
The European commission has sent US attorney general Eric Holder Jr a letter demanding explanations for American data snooping.
European Union officials have demanded "swift and concrete answers" to their requests for assurances from the US that its mass data surveillance programmes do not breach the fundamental privacy rights of European citizens.
The European commission's vice-president, Viviane Reding, has sent a letter with seven detailed questions to the US attorney general, Eric Holder Jr, demanding explanations about Prism and other American data snooping programmes.
Reding warns him that "given the gravity of the situation and the serious concerns expressed in public opinion on this side of the Atlantic" she expects detailed answers before they meet at an EU-US justice ministers' meeting in Dublin on Friday.
She also warns Holder that people's trust that the rule of law will be respected – including a high level of privacy protection for both US and EU citizens – is essential to the growth of the digital economy, including transatlantic business and the nature of the US response could affect the whole transatlantic relationship.
In the letter, released to the Guardian, Reding details her serious concerns that the Americans are "accessing and processing, on a large scale, the data of EU citizens using major US online service providers". She says programmes such as Prism, and the laws that authorise them, could have "grave adverse consequences for the fundamental rights of EU citizens".
The EU's action came as the first constitutional challenge in the US to the widespread surveillance of American citizens was laid down. In a lawsuit filed in New York, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) accused the US government of a process that was "akin to snatching every American's address book".
The ACLU's lawsuit claimed the National Security Agency's acquisition of phone records of millions of Verizon users violated the first and fourth amendments, which guarantee citizens' right to association, speech and to be free of unreasonable searches and seizures.
EU officials have repeatedly raised with the Americans the scope of legislation such as the Patriot Act which can lead to European companies being required to transfer data to the US in breach of EU and national law. The commission's vice-president and justice commissioner says the exchange of data for law enforcement purposes must take place to the greatest possible extent through established formal channels.
"Direct access of US law enforcement to the data of EU citizens on servers of US companies should be excluded unless in clearly defined, exceptional and judicially reviewable situations," writes Reding.
Reding laid out the seven questions she said needed to be answered:
• Are Prism and other similar programmes aimed only at the data of US citizens and residents, or also – even primarily – at non-US nationals, including EU citizens?
• Is access to, collection of or processing of data on the basis of Prism and other programmes … limited to specific and individual cases, and if so what criteria are applied?
• Is the data of individuals accessed, collected or processed in bulk (or on a very wide scale, without justification relating to specific individual cases) either regularly or occasionally?
• Is the scope of these programmes restricted to national security or foreign intelligence or is it broader?
• What avenues, judicial or administrative, are available to companies in the US or the EU to challenge access to, collection of and processing of data under Prism or other programmes?
• What avenues are available to EU citizens to be told if they are affected by Prism or other similar programmes and how do they compare with those available to US citizens?
• What avenues are available to EU citizens or companies to challenge access to, collection of and processing of their personal data under Prism and similar programmes, and how does that compare with the rights of US citizens?
More:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/11/europe-us-privacy