back to article MEPs demand privacy safeguards on cross-border policing

MEPs have voted to insert data protection provisions into a proposed framework on police and judicial cooperation, meaning the European Commission will be required to pay as much lip service to the proposals as it can be bothered to. The provisions included a stipulation that authorities should only have access to data held by “ …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
Anonymous Coward

Sounds very positive

But then look what happened after 2006/24/EC, the data retention directive, all the little nazi's crawled out of the woodwork.

Suddenly laws were being passed to monitor all politically active people (France) simply on the claim that they may be a threat at some time in future. Swedens, 'monitor everyone in case they become Russian spies' law, UK's, 'all Ur data belong us', German interior minister lobbying for total monitoring of all communications all the time, just because he has a shit life as a cripple, everyone else should suffer.

Since the MEPs are elected, it's a big feedback loop to them when this cr*p gets through, they get the only feedback from the public.

0
0
Coat

Pedantry mode on: actually it's Brussels at the moment

The European Parliament building in Strasbourg is actually closed at the moment because the ceiling fell in. MEPs are meeting in Brussels instead.

0
0
Silver badge
Paris Hilton

What is this? Restore my faith in government month?

I'm seeing a number of positive initiatives recently - patent workers on strike demanding they be allowed to do a better job, US judges coming down against RIAA snooping and now this! It's playing havoc with my cynicism. Okay, this isn't perfect but it's good to see some MEPs care enough about this to try and do *something*. Anyone know the names of those responsible? They deserve some good publicity, I'd guess.

Paris - because she cares deeply about privacy, too.

0
0
Thumb Up

At least they're talking about it

From the headline I had assumed that the proposal would have been "no privacy for anyone except state officials". That would have followed the usual principle of "One rile for us, one rule for them" that seems to have become the norm lately.

The fact that individual privacy is a concern at these levels is good. Now, lets have some strong protections please.

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.

Forums