11 Amendments of Assita KANKO related to 2022/2188(INI)
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Welcomes the UK legislative intention to implement a new pro-growth and pro-innovation data protection framework that reduces burdens on organisations and boosts the economy.
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Underlines the risks in the liberal onward transfer of personal data to non-EU countries that may do not provide for an adequate level of protection; recalls that a primary data recipient may only transfer personal data onwards if the recipient is also subject to rules affording an adequate level of protection; stresses, therefore, that the UK must ensure that its data transfers to non-EU countries are based on regulations, appropriate safeguards and derogations;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. CondemnsExpresses its concern over the UK’s general and broad exemption from the data protection principles and data subject rights for the processing of personal data, set out in its Data Protection Act, for immigration purposes; believes that the exemption in cases in which giving effect to data subjects’ rights would jeopardise effective immigration control or in the investigation or detection of activities that would undermine the maintenance of effective immigration control does not comply with the principle of legal certainty and therefore, is not sufficient to prevent arbitrary decision- making;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Condemns the UK’s general and broad exemption from the data protection principles and data subject rights for the processing of personal data, set out in its Data Protection Act, for immigration purposes; believes that the exemption in cases in which giving effect to data subjects’ rights would jeopardise effective immigration control or in the investigation or detection of activities that would undermine the maintenance of effective immigration control doesmay potentially not comply with the principle of legal certainty and therefore, is not sufficient to prevent arbitrary decision-making;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Expresses its concern overCalls for close and continuous monitoring the proposed UK Data Protection and Digital Information Bill, which would allow for automated decision- making; stresses that this bill would deprive individuals of their right, protected in the EU under the EU General Data Protection Regulation2 and internationally under the Convention for the Protection of Individuals with Regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data, not to be subject to a decision based solely on automated processing (including profiling) that has either a legal or similarly significant effect on them; _________________ 2 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1).
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. DeploresIn view of the fact that the Commission has pledged to closely monitor the situation and repeal the adequacy decisions if privacy would no longer be ‘essentially equivalent’ in the UK, it is pointed out that the provisions in the new UK Data Protection and Digital Information Bill that weaken the obligations for data controllers and processors, including the new provisions that only require a senior responsible individual to be appointed when carrying out processing, which is likely to result in a high risk to individuals; deplores, equally, the provisions removing the requirement to designate a non-UK based representative for data controllers and processors that is subject to UK data protection rules, and those eliminating the obligation to consult with the UK data protection supervisory authority prior to processing when the controller’s assessment indicates that the processing is likely to result in a high risk;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Deplores the provisions in the new UK Data Protection and Digital Information Bill that weaken the obligations for data controllers and processors, including the new provisions that only require a senior responsible individual to be appointed when carrying out processing, which is likely topotentially result in a high risk to individuals; deplores, equally, the provisions removing the requirement to designate a non-UK based representative for data controllers and processors that is subject to UK data protection rules, and those eliminating the obligation to consult with the UK data protection supervisory authority prior to processing when the controller’s assessment indicates that the processing is likely to result in a high risk;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. UrgeSuggests the UK to fulfil the data protection requirements for the processing of passenger name record data, in line with Article 552 of the TCA; deplores the long transition period of three years, which is delaying the implementation of the requirement to delete passengers’ personal data after their departure from the country;
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Points out that, with regard to the necessary revision of the adequacy decision for the transfer of personal data to the UK in two years, it is of the utmost importance that guaranteeing the rights protected under the European Convention on Human Rights be non-negotiable and that Parliament closely and regularly monitors any non- compliance;
Amendment 52 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Recalls that the fundamental right to a fair trial includes, among other things, the right to information, the right to interpretation and translation, the right to have a lawyer, right to remain silent, the right to be presumed innocent and the right to be present at trial, as well as special safeguards for children who are suspects or accused persons in criminal proceedings and the right to legal aid, which must also be ensured in the course of judicial cooperation in criminal matters with non- EU countries;