Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-09-20-Speech-3-053"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000920.5.3-053"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, I have no doubt that in the age of new communications technologies, in the age of the Internet, which is well under way at the beginning of this new century, we legislators are faced with a very exciting challenge: to protect people from intrusion and from attacks on their private life, their dignity or their reputation. The protection of these rights is recognised in numerous legislative texts of a universal nature, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, of a transnational nature, such as the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Liberties, or of a national nature, such as the constitutions of the Member States, but the legislative diversity in this area requires that efforts be made in terms of the harmonisation and unification of criteria.
The majority of countries are beginning a legislative process to prevent violations of people’s fundamental rights, such as the right to private life, and this right is also expressly included in Article 8 of the draft Charter of Fundamental Rights. We are therefore facing a legislative challenge of unquestionable importance, which must regulate to ensure that this right is respected and the exceptions which, in a democratic society, it is necessary to establish in order, as the Convention of the Protection of Human Rights says, to safeguard public security, defend public order and prevent crime.
The report which I am presenting to Parliament aims to analyse one of the many aspects involved in this legislative task: the creation of a single secretariat for the three supervisory bodies for the protection of data from Europol, Schengen and customs information, within the framework of the third pillar and in the field of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters enshrined in Chapter VI of the Treaty.
The Council’s proposal for a decision is correct but is, in my view, timid and does not go far enough. In this delicate field of data protection we must achieve two fundamental objectives: transparency in the future functioning of the secretariat and the independence of its work.
I do not believe that either objective is fully guaranteed in the Council’s proposal, hence the content of the amendments I am proposing, which have been accepted practically unanimously in the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights. Justice and Home Affairs. I wonder whether it is a positive thing, in terms of transparency, to have three joint data protection bodies within the third pillar? I believe not. I therefore believe that the final objective should be the establishment of a single body corresponding to a single legal framework within the European Union and that that body be provided with its own budget and staff, even exceeding the normal distribution between pillars, taking advantage of the option provided for in Article 42 of the Treaty of the European Union.
Ladies and gentlemen, this Parliament is currently examining and debating the consequences for personal and economic relations in the European Union of the discovery of a possible spying network known as the Echelon system, and is also studying a regulation on the protection of physical persons in the processing of data by the institutions of the Community. We are furthermore now examining this proposal for the third pillar. As we will see, these are different aspects of the same problem. I therefore believe that this Parliament must go further than the Council’s decision, which, as I have said, falls short on aspects such as the election and appointment of the secretariat, its dismissal or the guarantee of professional secrecy in its functioning.
Independence is another basic element which is not sufficiently guaranteed in the Council’s proposal. Parliament is the institution which must guarantee its independence, by means of the democratic control which legitimately corresponds to it. That is why in the future the body should be appointed by Parliament and the secretariat of the three bodies would enjoy more independence if the costs of staffing and the resources needed for its funding were to be included in section 8B of the general European Union budget, as I propose, and not in the Council’s budget. Let us not fool ourselves, financial independence is essential to guaranteeing functional independence.
Ladies and gentlemen, we are legislating in a field which is fundamental to the future of our interpersonal, economic and commercial relations. Our challenge is to create a balance and compatibility between the right to privacy and the right of free access to information. The introduction of new technologies, computers and telecommunications has broken down barriers and transcended borders. There has been a genuine revolution in commercial, social and personal relations which have a real effect on the daily lives of citizens: health, advertising, banking transactions, or even aspects which relate to the security and defence of citizens, and of States themselves, can be jeopardised if there are no rules to guarantee the correct transmission and storage of the data which today circulate with total freedom and which are not immune to the serious danger of indiscriminate use."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples