FW: [FYI] Telecommunication Council Wants New Investigation Into Privacy Rules

[Caspar Bowden]

fyi

>http://www.heise.de/tp/english/inhalt/te/9838/1.html
>Telecommunication Council Wants New Investigation Into Privacy Rules
>
>Jelle van Buuren   17.10.2001
>
>After the political climate has changed the battle is on about the 
>length of the storage of traffic data
>
>The European Ministers of Telecommunication decided on Monday in 
>Luxembourg to investigate if the draft privacy rules of the European 
>Commission on electronic communication should be revised.
>
>The United Kingdom and the Netherlands asked the Council to investigate

>if the proposed privacy rules still stroke 'the right balance between 
>privacy and the needs of the law enforcement agencies in the light of 
>the battle against terrorism.'
>
>The European Commission proposed last year a ' Directive concerning the

>processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the 
>electronic communications sector' ( draft proposal). Article 6 of this 
>directive says that 'traffic data relating to subscribers and users 
>processed for the purpose of the transmission of a communication and 
>stored by the provider must be erased or made anonymous upon completion

>of the transmission'.
>
>The UK and some other Member States tried several times to change this 
>article. According to a document of the European Working Party on 
>Police Cooperation, published in the Statewatch bulletin, various 
>delegations 'expressed misgivings' about the implications of this 
>article. 'That provision would render it impossible to monitor the 
>recent activities of persons under investigation since information on 
>their communications would not be available. The ability to retrieve 
>and rapidly obtain data on communications is of major importance in 
>solving crime,' the  report states.
>
>Till now these Member States didn't succeed in changing the rules. Last

>June, the Telecommunication Council reached a compromise on the 
>Commissions Directive, with only small changes which gave the Member 
>States more powers to set national rules on the  storage of traffic 
>data.
>
>The European Parliament however suggested some amendments to enhance 
>the privacy rules. The report from the Committee on Citizens' Freedoms 
>and Rights (LIBE) on the proposed new Directive was rejected by plenary

>session of the European Parliament on 5 September by 204 votes to 129 
>with 155 abstentions (the primary reason for the report's rejection was

>the issue of "spam", unsolicited e-mails). The European Parliament is 
>expected to come with a new report next month.
>
>
>The European Council and the European parliament have to agree on the 
>proposal of the Commission. The European parliament has the power to 
>block the proposals. If Council and Parliament however come to a 
>compromise, that text will come in force.
>
>After the attacks of the 11th September, the political climate has 
>changed. The Council has not taken a formal decision to alter the 
>provisions of the directive. According to a Dutch spokesman, the 
>Council only decided to study if there was a need of changing the 
>directive. The Telecommunication Council of 6th December must decide on

>this point. So then the Council and the Parliament must trie to reach 
>agreement on the base of the new position of the Council and the 
>rewritten report of the European Parliament.
>
>The move of the Dutch Government is strikingly, as the Netherlands were

>in favour of strong privacy rules and opposed suggestions made by the 
>United Kingdom and other Member States to soften the privacy rules.
>
>But Dutch Government announced last weak in an action plan to combat 
>terrorism, it was going to investigate which sort of communication data

>telecom providers are obliged to store and which problem intelligence 
>services and the police are encountering 'because of the lack of 
>obligations to store historical traffic data'. According to a 
>spokesman, the government will look not only at the length of the 
>storage of data, but also if besides traffic data also location data 
>will fall under the obligation.
>
>The Dutch spokesman said the government was still undecided whether the

>European privacy rules should be changed. 'But it is clear that we have

>some concerns. Otherwise we hadn't asked to look again at the proposed 
>privacy rules.'