The proposal, introduced jointly by France, the
UK
,
Ireland and Sweden in April 2004, is intended to ease judicial
cooperation in criminal matters by harmonising the legislation of
Member States relating to the retention of data processed and
stored by
ISP
s and telcos.
It takes the form of a draft Framework Decision, which sets out
provisions for the retention of communications data – data that
identifies the caller and the means of communication (e.g.
subscriber details, billing data, e-mail logs, personal details of
customers and records showing the location where mobile phone calls
were made) but not the content of the communications.
The draft provides for data to be retained in principle for a
minimum of 12 and a maximum of 36 months. But it was rejected by
the European Parliament yesterday, after
MEP
s
considered a report into the proposal by liberal
MEP
Alexander Nuno Alvaro.
This report highlighted problems with the legal basis on which
the Decision is founded, and the proportionality of its plans.
The report demanded that Member States produce a study proving
the need for the data retention arrangements. It also suggested
checking whether the Decision's objectives might be better achieved
by implementing the Council of Europe's Convention on Cybercrime –
the first international treaty on criminal offences committed
against or with the help of computer networks.
The Parliament's concerns with the Council’s proposals are
shared by the European Commission. Last week, the Commission
announced that it will put forward its own plans for a data
retention law that would limit the retention period to one
year.
According to Information Society and Media Commissioner Viviane
Reding, any harmonisation of
EU
data retention laws
should be made by the Commission rather than individual Member
States, because the Commission-led legislative process is more
transparent than that led by the Council.
Under the current process,
MEP
s can only give their
views on the proposals. According to the Parliament, Minister
Nicolas Schmit has declared that the Council maintains its text –
i.e. it wants to progress the draft Decision.
Kathalijne Buitenweg, Dutch
MEP
and
Greens/
EFA
Coordinator of the Committee, expressed her
outrage at the Council’s action.
"If
EU
ministers try to push these laws through
without any regard to the Parliament and the legitimate concerns it
has raised about privacy and costs for business – many of them
small, then we should go to the European Court of Justice and let
them decide if this is an area where
MEP
s should have
the right of co-decision,” she said.
Under the co-decision procedure, the Council of Ministers and
Parliament would need to agree the text for it to become law.
Ms Buitenweg added: "the European Commission shares our view
that this costly and hard-to-execute proposal, which has severe
implications on privacy rights as well as business, deserves an
appropriate legal base."
