# CE2004088EN.01040101.xml

| 8.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 88/401 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 88/401

---

(2004/C 88 E/0407)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2317/03

by Armando Cossutta (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(14 July 2003)

Subject:   European citizens' right to privacy

Subject:

The EU-US summit was held on 25 June this year. One of the topics was or should have been the TIA project (originally ‘Total Information Awareness’, subsequently changed to ‘Terrorism Information Awareness’), basically a project to provide a gigantic apparatus for gathering and analysing information obtained from the most varied sources, ranging from existing data banks to commercial transactions, from people's movements to intercepted communications. According to Stefano Rodotà, the guarantor of the Italian privacy watchdog, we are witnessing a new dimension of surveillance, which increases the power of the State to obtain any personal data, irrespective of who gathered it and the original purpose for which it was gathered. The European Parliament, via its President Pat Cox, made its views clear: ‘we cannot let the US dictate law in Europe’.

| 1. | What was the outcome, as regards the TIA, of the summit meeting between the EU and the US held on 25 June this year? |
| --- | --- |

1.

What was the outcome, as regards the TIA, of the summit meeting between the EU and the US held on 25 June this year?

| 2. | Does the Commission not consider that US legislation on the subject cannot and must not have extraterritorial validity and that, if necessary, the most appropriate way of settling such issues is by international treaty? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Does the Commission not consider that US legislation on the subject cannot and must not have extraterritorial validity and that, if necessary, the most appropriate way of settling such issues is by international treaty?

| 3. | Did the Commission uphold the principle that it is unacceptable that the United States should gather, by any means at its disposal, information resulting from communications freely exchanged between European citizens? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Did the Commission uphold the principle that it is unacceptable that the United States should gather, by any means at its disposal, information resulting from communications freely exchanged between European citizens?

| 4. | What steps will the Commission take to safeguard the privacy of European citizens? |
| --- | --- |

4.

What steps will the Commission take to safeguard the privacy of European citizens?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(16 September 2003)

(16 September 2003)

| 1. | The Commission is following closely the whole range of initiatives introduced by the United States of America since 11 September 2001, which aim at enhancing security.
  Among these is the Terrorism Information Awareness (TIA) project, raised by the Honourable Member. Since the beginning of 2003, various congressional actions have aimed at imposing a moratorium on the use, without congressional approval and appropriate civil liberties protections, of data mining technology by the Defence department and by the new Department of Homeland Security. In February 2003, Congress suspended funding for the Total Information Awareness programme and required the Defence Department to explain the project's privacy and civil liberties implications. It also restricted the implementation of the programme on American persons to specific authorisation by law from Congress. This text was signed into law by the President of the United States on 20 February 2003. On 20 May 2003, the Department of Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) published that report. The name of the programme was changed from ‘Total’ to Terrorism Information Awareness project, as noted by the Honourable Member. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The Commission is following closely the whole range of initiatives introduced by the United States of America since 11 September 2001, which aim at enhancing security.

Among these is the Terrorism Information Awareness (TIA) project, raised by the Honourable Member. Since the beginning of 2003, various congressional actions have aimed at imposing a moratorium on the use, without congressional approval and appropriate civil liberties protections, of data mining technology by the Defence department and by the new Department of Homeland Security. In February 2003, Congress suspended funding for the Total Information Awareness programme and required the Defence Department to explain the project's privacy and civil liberties implications. It also restricted the implementation of the programme on American persons to specific authorisation by law from Congress. This text was signed into law by the President of the United States on 20 February 2003. On 20 May 2003, the Department of Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) published that report. The name of the programme was changed from ‘Total’ to Terrorism Information Awareness project, as noted by the Honourable Member.

| 2. | Given the nature of the TIA programme and the possibility that its activities might involve the rights of European citizens, the Commission is actively monitoring developments in this field and has already raised the issue in the framework of the ongoing discussions with the United States on access to personal data collected by airlines (Passenger Name Record or ‘PNR’). The Commission shares the Honourable Member's view that the scope of United States' legislation on data collection should not operate extra-jurisdictionally. The nature of the activities under examination, however, is such that international cooperation will be needed to find solutions to areas of concern. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Given the nature of the TIA programme and the possibility that its activities might involve the rights of European citizens, the Commission is actively monitoring developments in this field and has already raised the issue in the framework of the ongoing discussions with the United States on access to personal data collected by airlines (Passenger Name Record or ‘PNR’). The Commission shares the Honourable Member's view that the scope of United States' legislation on data collection should not operate extra-jurisdictionally. The nature of the activities under examination, however, is such that international cooperation will be needed to find solutions to areas of concern.

| 3. | Although the TIA was not formally on the agenda of the Union-United States Summit of 25 June 2003, the broader issue of data protection was, in connection with the discussions on PNR referred to above.
  The Commission agrees with the Honourable Member that the various United States' laws aimed at collecting data are likely to affect the rights of European citizens and will therefore continue to monitor developments and discuss the matter with the United States in order to find satisfactory solutions that ensures the greatest possible respect for European data protection principles and safeguard the right to privacy of European citizens. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Although the TIA was not formally on the agenda of the Union-United States Summit of 25 June 2003, the broader issue of data protection was, in connection with the discussions on PNR referred to above.

The Commission agrees with the Honourable Member that the various United States' laws aimed at collecting data are likely to affect the rights of European citizens and will therefore continue to monitor developments and discuss the matter with the United States in order to find satisfactory solutions that ensures the greatest possible respect for European data protection principles and safeguard the right to privacy of European citizens.

| 4. | The Commission takes note of the Honourable Member's opinion that the most appropriate way of settling such issues is an international treaty and will give consideration to this option in its internal deliberations as well as in its discussions with the United States. The Commission will continue to keep the Civil Liberties Committee of the Parliament informed on the progress of these discussions and would welcome further debate on this matter in that forum. |
| --- | --- |

4.

The Commission takes note of the Honourable Member's opinion that the most appropriate way of settling such issues is an international treaty and will give consideration to this option in its internal deliberations as well as in its discussions with the United States. The Commission will continue to keep the Civil Liberties Committee of the Parliament informed on the progress of these discussions and would welcome further debate on this matter in that forum.

---