Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-04-21-Speech-3-095"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100421.5.3-095"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I would like to thank the Presidency and you, Commissioner Malmström, for what you have said. The Presidency has rightly said that the TFTP agreement on the exchange of SWIFT bank data is about principles. It is about fundamental constitutional principles, it is about the protection of privacy – Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. However, it is also about effective legal protection and fair procedures – Articles 6 and 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights. It is about genuine proportionality from a constitutional legal point of view, and I stress from a constitutional legal point of view, because it is not about simply getting a feel for proportionality; we need actual evidence of the need for, and suitability of, a measure and finally also evidence of the proportionality itself.
Here, I again have to make clear what other experts and even the investigative authorities have said repeatedly. In my opinion, it cannot be proven that the mass transfer of personal data without specific initial suspicions is at all appropriate and that we do not have significantly less intensive means of intervention that would suffice to pursue these goals. Without a prior decision in an individual case on the basis of existing suspicions, any access to the bank data of European citizens is disproportionate. It must therefore be ensured that there is no bulk transfer of data.
Otherwise, this agreement would represent a breach of existing European and international treaties, and that is exactly what most European supreme courts have made very clear in rulings up to this point – in particular, the German Federal Constitutional Court in March – when it was a matter of data retention. Therefore, Parliament cannot and should not make any compromises on its previous positions, but must ensure compatibility with EU law during and after negotiations, if need be then by all means with the presentation of the mandate and the results of the negotiations before the European Court of Justice.
I therefore call on the Commission and the Council to clearly present Parliament’s conditions to the United States and to provide the necessary clear evidence of proportionality. Otherwise, Parliament will remain unable to agree to a TFTP agreement."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples