IP: 'European Voice' says Bush lobbying EU to drop prohibition on blanket traffic data retention

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

> From: statewatch-news () statewatch pipal net
> [mailto:statewatch-news () statewatch pipal net]
> Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 6:48 AM
>
> Statewatch News Online, 2 November 2001
>
> See: <http://www.statewatch.org/news>
>
> INTERCEPTION OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS IN THE EU
> UPDATE
>
> - US calls for EU data protection to be ditched
> - Council Legal Service says governments already have powers to combat
> terrorism
> - European Parliament committee re-affirms its report on new directive
>
> The European Voice newspaper reports that President Bush has written to
> Guy Verhofstadt, the Belgian Prime Minister who currently holds the
> Presidency of the EU, asking to the proposed EU directive on privacy and
> telecommunications being discussed in the European Parliament and the
> Council to be changed to allow for interception for criminal
> investigations. The US, says the letter, is against the provision in
> existing EU law that data can only be retained for the purposes of
> checking a customer's bill and for no other purpose.
>
> A US official is quoted as saying that: "This is not an US-EU issue, it
> is more a question of law enforcement versus a strict interpretation of
> civil liberties".
>
> The US is adding its voice to those of the EU law enforcement agencies
> and the UK government, which have been demanding the end to the
> protections given by the 1995 and 1997 EU Directives to citizens from
> general surveillance of telecommunications (e-mails, faxes, phone-calls
> and internet usage).
>
> STATEWATCH ANALYSES OF POST-11 SEPTEMBER EU
> MEASURES AFFECTING CIVIL LIBERTIES AND
> ACCOUNTABILITY
>
> Statewatch has completed two analyses of the new measures
> being proposed in the EU following 11 September. One covers the new
> legislative measures, the other new "operational" measures.
>
> LEGISLATIVE MEASURES MORE CONCERNED WITH LAW
> ENFORCEMENT THAN TERRORISM
>
> Of the eleven measures being rushed through in the EU, six were proposed
> before 11 September 11 and another four were firmly on the EUs agenda.
> The only genuinely new anti-terrorist measure is the commitment to
> examine immigration and asylum legislation with reference to the
> terrorist threat, which suggests a general tightening of controls on all
> asylum-seekers, immigrants and third- country nationals entering the EU.
> The Statewatch report
> concludes:
>
> As it stands, the anti-terrorism programme amounts to little more than
> the fast-tracking of a raft of law enforcement legislation that was
> already on the EUs agenda and goes well beyond the investigation and
> prosecution of terrorism.
>
> "ANTI-TERRORISM ROADMAP CREATES INFORMAL AND
> UNACCOUNTABLE "OPERATIONAL" GROUPS
>
> Many of the "operational" initiatives concern the creation of ad hoc,
> informal, groups, targets and cooperation. There is little or no mention
> of accountability to the European parliament or national parliaments. No
> mention at all of data protection or to recourse to courts for
> individuals who might be affected. Moreover, there is a real danger that
> these "temporary" arrangements will become permanent leaving a whole
> layer of EU inter-agencies informal groups, information and intelligence
> exchanges and operational practices quite unaccountable.
>
> EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT TAKES COUNCIL TO COURT FOR
> FAILURE TO CONSULT OVER NEW (NATO) CLASSIFICATION
> CODE - THE "SOLANA TWO DECISION"
>
> The European Parliament is taking the Council of the European Union to
> the Court of Justice over its failure to consult the parliament over the
> adoption of a new classification code for access to documents in March
> 2001. The parliament argues that this was quite inappropriate as the
> institutions (the parliament, Council and the European Commission) were
> in the process of adopting a new Regulation on public access to
> documents.
>
> The Secretary-General of the Council, Mr Solana, drew up the new
> classification code which was simply nodded through by the General
> Affairs Council - the European Parliament was not consulted. The
> Decision completely changed the Council's classification codes to meet
> NATO demands.
>
> Extensive background and documentation, including the full-text of the
> EU/NATO security regulations


For archives see:
http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/