5 Amendments of Jens ROHDE related to 2011/2025(INI)
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. In this regard particularly urges the Commission to strengthen the current provisions on data protection in connection with data transfers to third countries, in relation to cloud computing, data mining and similar technological developments allowing for hosting, processing and connecting data virtually and across borders; emphasises the need to introduce legally binding obligations on businesses outsourcing data, harmonised ‘adequacy assessment’ of third countries and harmonised enforcement obligations on Member States; believes that all EU citizens should be ensured their fundamental right of privacy and data protection regardless of the data controller’s geographical location; believes that a further harmonised legal framework would increase legal clarity for businesses, reduce administrative burdens and improve the protection of individuals’ personal data;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Invites the Commission to resist calls for new imprecise broad principles whichBelieves that the revision of the legal framework must ensure flexibility to secure its ability to meet future needs as technology develops; however, emphasises that the Commission should take care to ensure the new principles will not be as broadly and imprecisely formulated that they may cause legal uncertainty, skew competition, erect trade barriers, contravene the presumption of innocence and create additional burdens on controllers without quantifiable benefits in resolving genuine problems;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. ReWelcommends that any concrete implementation of ‘privacy by design’ is based on the existing EU model with respect to goods,e Commission’s proposal for ‘privacy by design’ as a general principle and invites the Commission to further develop this concept; in this regards highlights the necessity for any implementation thereof to be based on solid and concrete criteria and definitions to ensure legal certainty, a level playing field and free movement;
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recommends that the Commission considers a possibility forreviews possible sanction methods, including behavioural sanctions, in case of infringement, instead of a principle of ‘accountability’;