Activities of Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD related to 2022/2188(INI)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on the implementation report on the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement
Amendments (17)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that the application of Part Three of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement1 (TCA) on law enforcement and judicial cooperation in criminal matters is contingent on the protection of human rights and fundamental freedomsunder the condition that the respect for democracy, the rule of law and the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, including as set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in the European Convention on Human Rights, and the commitment to high-level protection of personal data; _________________ 1 Trade and Cooperation Agreement between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community, of the one part, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, of the other part (OJ L 149, 30.4.2021, p. 10).
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Expresses its deep concerns over current legislative processes in the UK that would put these conditions at risk, namely the Retained EU Law Bill, the Bill of Rights Bill and the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill;
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Highlights that according to the CoE Commissioner for Human Rights, both the overall system for protecting human rights and the rights of specific groups, are under pressure in the UK; stresses that according to her report following her visit to the UK, the CoE Commissioner for Human Rights expressed concern about an increasingly antagonistic attitude towards human rights by the UK government, in view of recent and proposed changes to laws and policies, the increasing presentation of human rights as an obstacle to the effective implementation of government policies, and the verbal targeting of human rights defenders[1]; [1] https://rm.coe.int/report-on-the-visit- to-united-kingdom-from-27-june-to-1- july-2022-by-d/1680a952a5
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that Part Three of the TCA allows for extended data flows between the EU and the UK, such as the exchange of DNA data, passenger name record data and criminal record information; underlines, therefore, that it is of the utmost importance that the UK ensures adequate data protection standards, so as not to putthat the level of protection is essentially equivalent to that afforded by the European Union to avoid putting EU standards at risk when sharing data with the UK;
Amendment 15 #
4. Underlines the risks in the liberalserious risk of onward transfer of personal data to non-EU countries that 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 and that an equivalent level of data protection to that afforded by the European Union is guaranteed;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Insists that further particular attention should be paid to the legal framework in place in the UK in the fields of national security and processing of personal data by law enforcement authorities or for migration related matters in order to make sure that all the conditions required by Union data protection law, particularly Regulations 2016/679 and 2018/1725 and Directive 2016/680, and the case-law of the CJEU are fulfilled, and hence ensure that the level of protection is essentially equivalent to that afforded by the European Union; reminds that mass surveillance programmes such as Tempora are not equivalent with EU data protection rules and reiterates its call to take into consideration case law in this field such as the Schrems cases.
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Deplores the provisions in the new UK Data Protection and Digital Information Bill that would introduce new delegated legislative powers for the UK Government to legalise data processing for national security, law enforcement, and public authorities' access to personal data held by private entities; is deeply concerned by the introduction of delegated legislative powers that provide for some fundamental aspects of data protection law to be changed by the UK Government with secondary legislation; stresses the risks these delegated powers pose to legal certainty and the future of the UK adequacy decision;
Amendment 20 #
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 does not comply with the principle of legal certainty and therefore, is not sufficient to prevent arbitrary decision-making; is deeply concerned about the situation in the English Channel and the plans from the UK authorities to externalise the asylum system by sending asylum seekers to unsafe destinations, including through the proposed "Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Government of the Republic of Rwanda on an Asylum Partnership Agreement’ signed between the British and Rwandan governments on 14 April 2022; urges the need to comply with its international obligations such as the Geneva Convention on the status of refugees and the European Convention on Human Rights;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Expresses its concern over 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; stresses that enacting the UK Data Protection and Digital Information Bill in its current form could further jeopardise the adequacy decision granted to the UKand could raise the spectre of another Privacy Shield-style workaround. _________________ 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 28 #
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 requireing the appointment of 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 32 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Highlights that the UK data protection supervisory authority has found multiple instances of enforcement failures and that its statistics show very low rates of hard enforcement; recalls that, in order to ensure a high level of data protection, the anticipated rules must be enforced and individuals must have access to an effective complaints procedure; is deeply concerned by provisions in the new UK Data Protection and Digital Information Bill that would expand the authority's discretion not to act upon complaints.
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Deplores the provisions in the new UK Data Protection and Digital Information Bill that would introduce new powers for the UK Government to interfere with the effective and objective enforcement of data protection law, including the appointment process of members of the supervisory authority, the powers to determine their salaries, to influence its regulatory priorities, and to vetoe the function of certain regulatory functions; recalls that the UK Parliament has already expressed concerns over the compatibility of the Ministerial appointment procedure with the status of independent authorities, and recommended that the UK data protection supervisory authority becomes directly responsible to, and funded by, Parliament.
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Is deeply concerned about the proposal to expand data sharing, including biometric data, under the Prüm regime; Underlines that Article 541 of the TCA provides for an amendment procedure in the event that EU law under the Prüm framework is amended substantially; recalls, therefore, that the UK’s participation in the newly revised Prüm framework is not automatic and should be under the conditional ons that the UK maintaining its current human rights standards and ensuring an adequate data protection frameworkrespects the fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals, including continued adherence and giving effect to the ECHR, adequate protection of personal data, and effective legal safeguards, which are essential prerequisites for allowing police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters;
Amendment 43 #
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 monitors any non- compliance; calls on the Commission to launch infringement procedures to restore compliance with the Protocol in case of non-compliance;
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Underlines that continued adherence and giving effect to the ECHR was one of the essential prerequisites in the TCA, in particular concerning law enforcement and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, including cooperation with Europol and Eurojust; insists that personal data exchanges with JHA Agencies should be allowed only where the EU data protection standards are guaranteed;
Amendment 58 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13 b (new)
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13b. Condemns incidents where EU citizens trying to enter the UK without visa have been detained and held in immigration removal centers, often for disproportionately long periods; regrets the UK decision to apply differentiated treatment in terms of visa fees for the citizens of a number of EU countries; is concerned that visa procedures for EU citizens are lengthy and cumbersome;
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13 c (new)
Paragraph 13 c (new)
13c. Is concerned that citizens in Northern Ireland enjoy different rights depending on their nationality; urges the UK authorities to ensure there is no diminution of rights for the citizens in Northern Ireland and to fully respect the Good Friday Agreement in all its parts;