Res Communis Blog RSS

Category Archives: Cyber

European Parliament decision of 3 April 2014 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2012, Section IX – European Data Protection Supervisor (COM(2013)0570 – C7-0281/2013 – 2013/2204(DEC))

Source – European Parliament:

1.European Parliament decision of 3 April 2014 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2012, Section IX – European Data Protection Supervisor (COM(2013)0570 – C7-0281/2013 – 2013/2204(DEC))

The European Parliament ,

– having regard to the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2012(1) ,

– having regard to the consolidated annual accounts of the European Union for the financial year 2012 (COM(2013)0570 – C7-0281/2013)(2) ,

– having regard to the Annual Report of the Court of Auditors on implementation of the budget for the financial year 2012, together with the institutions’ replies(3) ,

– having regard to the statement of assurance(4) as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors for the financial year 2012 pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

– having regard to Article 314(10) and Articles 317, 318 and 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

– having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities(5) , and in particular Articles 50, 86, 145, 146 and 147 thereof,

– having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002(6) , and in particular Articles 164, 165 and 166 thereof,

– having regard to Rule 77 of, and Annex VI to, its Rules of Procedure,

– having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinion of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A7-0228/2014),

1. Grants the European Data Protection Supervisor discharge in respect of the implementation of the European Data Protection Supervisor’s budget for the financial year 2012;

2. Sets out its observations in the resolution below;

3. Instructs its President to forward this Decision and the resolution that forms an integral part of it to the Council, the Commission, the Court of Justice of the European Union, the Court of Auditors, the European Ombudsman and the European Data Protection Supervisor, and to arrange for their publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

(1) OJ L 56, 29.2.2012.
(2) OJ C 334, 15.11.2013, p. 1.
(3) OJ C 331, 14.11.2013, p. 1.
(4) OJ C 334, 15.11.2013, p. 122.
(5) OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.
(6) OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1.

2.European Parliament resolution of 3 April 2014 with observations forming an integral part of its Decision on discharge for implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2012, Section IX – European Data Protection Supervisor (COM(2013)0570 – C7-0281/2013 – 2013/2204(DEC))

The European Parliament ,

– having regard to the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2012(1) ,

– having regard to the consolidated annual accounts of the European Union for the financial year 2012 (COM(2013)0570 – C7-0281/2013)(2) ,

– having regard to the Annual Report of the Court of Auditors on implementation of the budget for the financial year 2012, together with the institutions’ replies(3) ,

– having regard to the statement of assurance(4) as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors for the financial year 2012 pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

– having regard to Article 314(10) and Articles 317, 318 and 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

– having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities(5) , and in particular Articles 50, 86, 145, 146 and 147 thereof,

– having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002(6) , and in particular Articles 164, 165 and 166 thereof,

– having regard to its previous discharge decisions and resolutions,

– having regard to Rule 77 of, and Annex VI to, its Rules of Procedure,

– having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinion of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A7-0228/2014),

1. Welcomes the conclusion of the Court of Auditors that the payments as a whole for the year ended on 31 December 2012 for administrative and other expenditure of the European Data Protection Supervisor (‘the Supervisor’) were free from material error and that the examined supervisory and control systems for administrative and other expenditure were effective;

2. Notes with satisfaction that in its 2012 annual report, the Court of Auditors observed that no significant weaknesses had been identified in respect to the audited topics related to the human resources and procurement for the Supervisor;

3. Notes that in 2012, the Supervisor had a total of EUR 7 624 090 in commitment appropriations (EUR 7 564 137 in 2011), and that the implementation rate of those appropriations was 89,69% (85,03% in 2011); finds this a positive development but calls for further efforts to improve the implementation rate and for the changes made to be monitored;

4. Stresses that the Supervisor’s budget is purely administrative; notes that the implementation rate of expenditure on persons working with the institution is 93,18 % (Title 1) and that the expenditure on buildings, furniture, equipment and miscellaneous operating expenditure is 100 % (Title 2); congratulates the Supervisor for the results of 2012;

5. Welcomes the progress regarding better management of allowances and the Court of Auditors’ finding that the measures taken were effective; welcomes, moreover, the fact that the Supervisor intends to continue to improve its system to monitor and control in a timely manner;

6. Invites the Supervisor to continue to monitor the allowances management and improve its performance levels;

7. Following last year’s request, asks the Supervisor to include detailed information on how the recent incorporation of structural changes and the implementation of the electronic system on case management have influenced the cost saving;

8. Recalls that the Treaty of Lisbon enhanced the Supervisor’s competences by extending data protection to all Union policy domains;

9. Takes note of the reorganisation of the Supervisor’s secretariat and the consequent creation of a new ICT unit; requests to be informed of the budgetary impact of that reform;

10. Acknowledges the inclusion of Parliament’s discharge recommendations in the annual activity report;

11. Urges the Supervisor to implement the recommendations made by the Commission’s internal audit service (IAS); expects that logistics and human resources units will improve efficiency following their implementation;

12. Expects to be informed about the full operability of the system which defines key performance indicators and the benchmarking system plan set in 2012; calls on the Supervisor to assess in detail the improvements achieved by that system in its next year’s annual activity report;

13. Calls on the Supervisor to continue informing Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control on the follow-up of the recommendations which are set forth in Parliament’s discharge resolutions;

14. Following last year’s request, asks the Supervisor to include an exhaustive table of all the human resources at the Supervisor’s disposal, broken down by category, grade, sex and nationality in the next annual activity report;

15. Calls on the Supervisor to cooperate with other institutions to come up with a unified methodology of presenting the translation costs in order to simplify the analysis and comparison of the costs;

16. Welcomes the signing of a service level agreement with the Commission’s IAS and expects the results of that agreement to be thoroughly stated in the annual activity report;

17. Considers, in general, that the Supervisor should pay particular attention to ensuring sound financial management, i.e. to using its appropriations economically, efficiently and effectively in the performance of its duties;

18. Calls on the Court of Auditors to include in its next annual report a review of the follow-up by the Supervisor of Parliament’s recommendations in this resolution.

(1) OJ L 56, 29.2.2012.
(2) OJ C 334, 15.11.2013, p. 1.
(3) OJ C 331, 14.11.2013, p. 1.
(4) OJ C 334, 15.11.2013, p. 122.
(5) OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.
(6) OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1.

FacebookTwitterGoogle+TumblrLinkedInEvernoteDiggSlashdotEmailShare

European Parliament decision of 3 April 2014 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications for the financial year 2012 (C7-0329/2013 – 2013/2241(DEC))

Source – European Parliament:

1.European Parliament decision of 3 April 2014 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications for the financial year 2012 (C7-0329/2013 – 2013/2241(DEC))

The European Parliament ,

– having regard to the final annual accounts of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications for the financial year 2012,

– having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications for the financial year 2012, together with the Body’s replies(1) ,

– having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 18 February 2014 (05849/2014 – C7-0054/2014),

– having regard to Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

– having regard to the Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities(2) , and in particular Article 185 thereof,

– having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002(3) , and in particular Article 208 thereof,

– having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1211/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 establishing the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) and the Office(4) , and in particular Article 13 thereof,

– having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities(5) ,

– having regard to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1271/2013 of 30 September 2013 on the framework financial regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 208 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council(6) , and in particular Article 108 thereof,

– having regard to Rule 77 of, and Annex VI to, its Rules of Procedure,

– having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0206/2014),

1. Postpones its decision on granting the Administrative Manager of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications discharge in respect of the implementation of the Body’s budget for the financial year 2012;

2. Sets out its observations in the resolution below;

3. Instructs its President to forward this Decision and the resolution that forms an integral part of it to the Administrative Manager of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for their publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

(1) OJ C 365, 13.12.2013, p. 9.
(2) OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.
(3) OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1.
(4) OJ L 337, 18.12.2009, p. 1.
(5) OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72.
(6) OJ L 328, 7.12.2013, p. 42.

2.European Parliament decision of 3 April 2014 on the closure of the accounts of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications for the financial year 2012 (C7-0329/2013 – 2013/2241(DEC))

The European Parliament ,

– having regard to the final annual accounts of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications for the financial year 2012,

– having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications for the financial year 2012, together with the Body’s replies(1) ,

– having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 18 February 2014 (05849/2014 – C7-0054/2014),

– having regard to Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

– having regard to the Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities(2) , and in particular Article 185 thereof,

– having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002(3) , and in particular Article 208 thereof,

– having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1211/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 establishing the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) and the Office(4) , and in particular Article 13 thereof,

– having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities(5) ,

– having regard to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1271/2013 of 30 September 2013 on the framework financial regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 208 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council(6) , and in particular Article 108 thereof,

– having regard to Rule 77 of, and Annex VI to, its Rules of Procedure,

– having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0206/2014),

1. Postpones its decision on the closure of the accounts of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications for the financial year 2012;

2. Instructs its President to forward this Decision to the Administrative Manager of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

(1) OJ C 365, 13.12.2013, p. 9.
(2) OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.
(3) OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1.
(4) OJ L 337, 18.12.2009, p. 1.
(5) OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72.
(6) OJ L 328, 7.12.2013, p. 42.

3.European Parliament resolution of 3 April 2014 with observations forming an integral part of its Decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications for the financial year 2012 (C7-0329/2013 – 2013/2241(DEC))

The European Parliament ,

– having regard to the final annual accounts of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications for the financial year 2012,

– having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications for the financial year 2012, together with the Body’s replies(1) ,

– having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 18 February 2014 (05849/2014 – C7-0054/2014),

– having regard to Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

– having regard to the Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities(2) , and in particular Article 185 thereof,

– having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002(3) , and in particular Article 208 thereof,

– having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1211/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 establishing the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) and the Office(4) , and in particular Article 13 thereof,

– having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities(5) ,

– having regard to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1271/2013 of 30 September 2013 on the framework financial regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 208 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council(6) , and in particular Article 108 thereof,

– having regard to its previous discharge decisions and resolutions,

– having regard to Rule 77 of, and Annex VI to, its Rules of Procedure,

– having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0206/2014),

A. whereas, according to its financial statements, the final budget of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (‘the Body’) for the financial year 2012 was EUR 3 190 000, representing an increase of 170,60 % compared to 2011; whereas this increase is due to the Body’s recently established nature; whereas the Body’s entire budget derives from the Union budget,

B. whereas the Court of Auditors has stated that it has obtained reasonable assurances that the Body’s annual accounts for the financial year 2012 are reliable and that the underlying transactions are legal and regular,

Comments on the reliability of accounts

1. Notes that the Body’s accounting system has been validated in 2013;

Comments on the legality and regularity of transactions

2. Regrets that the committed appropriations carried over, amounting to EUR 61 500 (10 % of the total committed appropriations carried over), did not correspond to legal commitments and were thus irregular; calls on the Body to take steps in order to avoid such situations in the future and to report on the steps taken by 1 September 2014;

3. Notes that the experiences learned in both 2011 and 2012 were addressed in 2013 by specifying the financial procedures and by providing additional refresher training courses to all financial actors; notes that additional attention was paid throughout 2013 to the correct opening of financial and legal commitments;

Budget and financial management

4. Notes with concern that budget monitoring efforts during the financial year 2012 resulted in a budget implementation rate of 63,4 % and that the payment appropriations execution rate was 66,16 %; calls on the Body to substantially improve budget monitoring efforts and the aforementioned rates of budget implementation and execution; expects the Body to report on the steps taken to remedy the situation by 1 September 2014;

Commitments and carryovers

5. Regrets that some EUR 101 000 (45 % of the committed appropriations carried over from 2011) were cancelled; expresses concern that appropriations of EUR 545 000 (17 % of the total 2012 appropriations) were not used and had to be cancelled; regrets that the level of carry-overs of committed appropriations to 2013 was high at EUR 611 000 (19% of the total); believes that this indicates difficulties in the planning and/or implementation of the Body’s activities, as the carry-overs for 2012 were mostly related to delayed recruitments and the absence of an effective policy to ensure the timely presentation and reimbursement of mission costs claimed by experts; calls on the Body to address the situation and to report to the discharge authority on the steps taken by 1 September 2014;

Transfers

6. Notes that according to the annual activity report as well as the Court of Auditor’s audit findings, the level and nature of transfers in 2012 have remained within the limits of the financial rules;

Procurement and recruitment procedures

7. Notes with concern that there is considerable room for improvement regarding the preparation, execution and documentation of procurement procedures; notes in particular that award procedures did not give sufficient attention to the price-quality ratio and that general award criteria had not been broken down further into sub criteria to allow a clear and comparable evaluation of the offers;

8. Regrets that the recruitment procedures examined showed significant shortcomings affecting transparency, namely that questions for written tests and interviews were set after the applications had been examined by the selection board, no threshold scores were set for admission to written tests and interviews and for inclusion in the list of suitable candidates, and nominations and changes in the composition of the selection board were not approved by the appointing authority;

9. Notes with concern that while most of the Body’s staff have an administrative or support function and do not travel, they have all been provided with a mobile phone with a monthly limit up to EUR 50; expresses concern that there are no controls to monitor private use;

10. Regrets that the Body does not have a treasury policy; notes that as a result, at the end of 2012, all cash held by the Body (EUR 1 600 000) was held in one bank, which has a BBB credit rating;

11. Calls on the Body to report on the actions taken to remedy the aforementioned outstanding issues concerning procurement and recruitment procedures by 1 September 2014;

Prevention and management of conflicts of interests and transparency

12. Regrets that the Body has provided limited information regarding conflicts of interests policy, referring only to conflicts of interests declarations being requested and making no mention of any code of conduct or policy in place; notes that there is nothing on the publication of the declarations, on awareness training in place or on bringing the Body into line with the Commission’s Guidelines on the Prevention and Management of Conflict of Interests in EU Decentralised Agencies; calls on the Body to remedy this situation before 1 September 2014; calls on the Body to provide the discharge authority with details of the measures being taken in this domain, particularly because it is composed by representatives of the electronic communication regulators of the Member States and it has to advise those regulators, as well as the Union institutions, and this situation requires a strong and transparent conflict of interests policy in place;

13. Notes that personal conflicts of interests declarations are requested from the members of the Body’s Management Committee and the Board of Regulators, as well as from their staff members; notes that declarations of conflicts of interests of the members of the recruitment selection committees have been updated on the basis of recommendations from the Court of Auditors; calls on the Body to inform the discharge authority of whether it plans to review its conflict of interests arrangements on the basis of the above mentioned Commission’s Guidelines;

14. Observes that the CVs and declarations of interests of the members of the Management Committee, the Administrative Manager and senior management are not publicly available; calls on the Body to remedy the situation as a matter of urgency;

Internal audit

15. Deplores the fact that there are a number of outstanding issues as regards the internal controls, namely that:
– the Body has not yet implemented the Internal Control Standards (ICS) on Objectives and performance indicators (ICS 5), Process and procedures (ICS 8), Document management (ICS 11) and Information and Communication (ICS 12),
– there is no procedure regarding the registration and disposal of fixed assets, and no physical inventory has been performed,
– procedures concerning the establishment, approval and recording of exceptions and deviations from policies and procedures have not been implemented;
16. Calls on the Body to remedy that situation and to report on its progress by 1 September 2014;

Performance

17. Requests that the Body communicate the results and impact its work has on European citizens in an accessible way, mainly through its website;

o
o o

18. Refers, in respect of the other observations accompanying its Decision on discharge, which are of a horizontal nature, to its resolution of 3 April 2014(7) on the performance, financial management and control of the agencies.

(1) OJ C 365, 13.12.2013, p. 9.
(2) OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.
(3) OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1.
(4) OJ L 337, 18.12.2009, p. 1.
(5) OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72.
(6) OJ L 328, 7.12.2013, p. 42.
(7) Texts adopted, P7_TA-PROV(2014)0299.

S. 1976: A bill to protect consumers by requiring reasonable security policies and procedures to protect data containing personal information, and to provide for nationwide notice in the event of a breach of security

S. 1976: A bill to protect consumers by requiring reasonable security policies and procedures to protect data containing personal information, and to provide for nationwide notice in the event of a breach of security was introduced on January 20, 2014 by Sen. John “Jay” Rockefeller IV (D-WV).

EU-US Summit: Joint Statement

Source – The White House:

The White House
Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release March 26, 2014
EU-US Summit: Joint Statement

We, the leaders of the European Union and the United States, met today in Brussels to reaffirm our strong partnership. We reaffirmed our shared values of democracy, individual freedom, the rule of law and human rights, and a common commitment to open societies and economies. Starting from those values, the European Union and the United States work together every day to address issues of vital interest and importance to our citizens and the world. We strive to create jobs and sustainable growth through sound economic policies. We seek a landmark Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership to build our common prosperity. We undertake joint efforts to build security and stability around the globe and to tackle pressing global challenges like climate change. Today, we took stock of our achievements, set priorities and charted the way ahead for a stronger transatlantic relationship, and rededicated ourselves to building a safer, more prosperous world for future generations. . . .

. . . We commit to expand cooperation in research, innovation and new emerging technologies, and protection of intellectual property rights as strong drivers for increased trade and future economic growth. Our collaboration in the space domain also contributes to growth and global security, including on an International Code of Conduct for Outer Space Activities. We will combine wherever possible our efforts as we did in the Transatlantic Ocean Research Alliance and through the GPS/Galileo agreement. The Transatlantic Economic Council will continue its work to improve cooperation in emerging sectors, specifically e-mobility, e-health and new activities under the Innovation Action Partnership. . . .

. . . The transatlantic digital economy is integral to our economic growth, trade and innovation. Cross border data flows are critical to our economic vitality, and to our law enforcement and counterterrorism efforts. We affirm the need to promote data protection, privacy and free speech in the digital era while ensuring the security of our citizens. This is essential for trust in the online environment.

We have made considerable progress on a wide range of transnational security issues. We cooperate against terrorism in accordance with respect for human rights. Agreements such as the Passenger Name Record and Terrorist Finance Tracking Programme that prevent terrorism while respecting privacy are critical tools in our transatlantic cooperation. We will strengthen our coordination efforts to prevent and counter violent extremism. We will continue looking for appropriate mechanisms to counter the threats posed by fighters departing to Syria and other unstable regions, who return home where they may recruit new fighters, plan and conduct terrorist operations. We also work to address the threats posed by activities of groups contributing to instability in these regions. We welcome our increasingly close cooperation in building the capacity of partner countries to counter terrorism and violent extremism within a framework of rule of law, particularly in the Sahel, Maghreb, Horn of Africa region and Pakistan. We pledge to deepen and broaden this cooperation through the United Nations, the Global Counterterrorism Forum, and other relevant channels. We have also decided to expedite and enhance cooperation on threats directly affecting the security of EU and US diplomatic staff and facilities abroad.

Data protection and privacy are to remain an important part of our dialogue. We recall the steps already taken, including the EU-U.S. ad hoc Working Group, and take note of the European Commission Communication of 27 November 2013 and President Obama’s speech and Policy Directive of 17 January 2014. We will take further steps in this regard. We are committed to expedite negotiations of a meaningful and comprehensive data protection umbrella agreement for data exchanges in the field of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, including terrorism. We reaffirm our commitment in these negotiations to work to resolve the remaining issues, including judicial redress. By ensuring a high level of protection of personal data for citizens on both sides of the Atlantic, this agreement will facilitate transfers of data in this area. The United States and the EU will also boost effectiveness of the Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement – a key channel of cooperation in the digital era. In addition, we are committed to strengthening the Safe Harbour Framework in a comprehensive manner by summer 2014, to ensure data protection and enable trade through increased transparency, effective enforcement and legal certainty when data is transferred for commercial purposes.

The Internet has become a key global infrastructure. We share a commitment to a universal, open, secure, and reliable Internet, based on an inclusive, effective, and transparent multi-stakeholder model of governance. As such, we reaffirm that human rights apply equally online and offline, and we endeavour to strengthen and improve this model while working towards the further globalisation of core Internet institutions with the full involvement of all stakeholders. We look forward to the transition of key Internet domain name functions to the global multi-stakeholder community based on an acceptable proposal that has the community’s broad support. We acknowledge the good expert-level cooperation developed in the framework of the EU-US Working Group on Cyber Security and Cybercrime. We commend the political success of our joint initiative to launch a Global Alliance against Child Sexual Abuse Online, as the EU prepares to hand over the lead to the United States, and we decide to tackle jointly the issue of transnational child sex offenders. We reiterate our support for the Budapest Convention on cybercrime, and encourage its ratification and implementation. Building on all these achievements and guided by shared values, we have today decided to launch a comprehensive EU-US cyber dialogue to strengthen and further our cooperation including on various cyber-related foreign policy issues. . . .

Event: Post-Graduate Legal Education: Privacy Law and Policy

Source – Institute for Information Law:

Post-Graduate Legal Education:
Privacy Law and Policy

Summer Course (July 7-11, 2014)

Programme Application Form Course Materials
General Information on the Summer Course

Description of the course:
This week-long summer course focuses on privacy law and policy related to the Internet, electronic communications and online and social media. It will explore the broader trends and recent developments in this rapidly changing field, and explain how businesses, governments and others can achieve their goals within it. The course will feature a distinguished faculty of European and American academics, regulators and practitioners who will investigate the EU and US legal frameworks and how they operate together.
Held in a historic building on one of Amsterdam’s most beautiful canals, the course will employ a seminar format that promotes interaction between participants and faculty and allows for a deeper examination of the subject than is possible at most professional conferences. Enrolment is limited to 25 participants.

See also the course flyer.

Objectives of the course:
At the conclusion of the course, participants will:

(1) Understand the latest developments in E.U. and U.S. privacy law related to the Internet, electronic communications and online and social media;
(2) Have insight into how these critical areas of privacy law and policy are likely to evolve in the future, and into the strategic and legal implications of these impending changes; and
(3) Possess a set of course materials containing the most current and relevant European and American legislative, judicial and regulatory documents in the area.

Faculty Organisers:
Dennis Hirsch, Geraldine W. Howell Professor of Law, Capital University Law School, USA
Kristina Irion, Marie Curie Fellow, Institute for Information Law, University of Amsterdam, NL

Faculty:
Daniel Cooper, Partner and Head of Global Privacy Practice, Covington & Burling, London, UK
Ian Brown, Associate Director, Oxford University Cyber Security Centre and Senior Research Fellow, Oxford Internet Institute, UK.
Chris Hoofnagle, Lecturer in Residence and Director, Information Privacy Programs, Berkeley Center for Law & Technology, UC Berkeley School of Law, US
Sjoera Nas, Internet and Telecom Expert, Dutch Data Protection Authority, NL
Christopher Kuner, Senior Of Counsel, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati LLP, Brussels, BE
Joris van Hoboken, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, New York University, Information Law Institute, US
Neil Richards, Professor of Law, Washington University School of Law, St Louis, US

Expert Panel on the Role of ISPs in public and private surveillance:
Caroline Goemans-Dorny, Senior Counsel, Office of Legal Affairs at the INTERPOL General Secretariat, FR
Seda Gürses, Post-Doctoral Research Fellow, New York University, Media, Culture and Communications Department, US
Max Schremps, Founder of europe-v-facebook.org, AT
Moderator: Nico van Eijk, Professor of Media and Telecommunications Law and Director of the Institute for Information Law, University of Amsterdam, NL.

Venue:
De Rode Hoed, Keizersgracht 102, Amsterdam.

Applicant profile:
The course is aimed at lawyers, government officials, NGO staff, academics, PhD students and others who work in the areas of privacy and data protection law. The course is taught at the post-graduate level. Participants should have some prior knowledge of the field.

Certificate:
At the close of the course, each participant will receive a Certificate of completion of the programme.

Tuition fee:
The tuition fee includes the seminar materials, five lunches, as well as the opening and closing receptions and a welcome dinner.

Standard fee € 1.975;
Participants from governmental and non-profit entities: € 1.100;
Participants from academic institutions: € 900.
Registration:
See the online application form.

Check this Web site for forthcoming information about the course programme and faculty.

Further information:
Kristina Irion
Institute for Information Law, University of Amsterdam,
Kloveniersburgwal 48, 1012 CX AMSTERDAM
THE NETHERLANDS
tel: +31 20 525 3406 /fax: +31 20 525 3033
email: informationlaw@uva.nl
Website: http://www.ivir.nl

FACT SHEET: U.S.-EU Cyber Cooperation

Source – The White House:

FACT SHEET: U.S.-EU Cyber Cooperation

The United States and the European Union work in close coordination on cyber-related issues both bilaterally and in multilateral fora. This cooperation is founded on our shared values, our interest in an open and interoperable Internet, and our commitment to multistakeholder Internet governance, Internet freedom, and protecting human rights in cyberspace. International cyberspace developments are central to our broader foreign and security policy, and are key elements of our strategic partnership.

U.S.-EU Cyber Dialogue

The new high-level U.S.-EU Cyber Dialogue announced at the 2014 U.S.-EU Summit will formalize and broaden our cooperation on cyber issues, building on shared commitments and achievements in key areas. This strategic dialogue will be the platform for close U.S.-EU coordination on:

International cyberspace developments;
Promotion and protection of human rights online;
International security issues, such as norms of behavior in cyberspace, cyber security confidence building measures, and application of existing international law; and
Cybersecurity capacity building in third countries.
U.S.-EU Working Group on Cybersecurity and Cybercrime

Established in the context of the 2010 Lisbon U.S.-EU Summit, this Working Group serves as a framework for U.S.-EU collaboration to enhance cybersecurity and cybercrime activities and contribute to countering global cybersecurity threats. The Working Group focuses on four areas where cooperative approaches add significant value to both regions: cyber incident management, public-private partnership on critical infrastructure cybersecurity, cybersecurity awareness raising, and cybercrime. Since its creation, the Working Group has successfully conducted a transatlantic cyber exercise, organized information exchanges on national and regional cyber exercises, developed public-private workshops on industrial control systems, and jointly promoted National Cyber Awareness Month in the U.S. and Europe, among other activities. The Working Group continues to focus on incident management and response, awareness raising, critical infrastructure protection, combatting botnets, promoting the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime, and enhancing the security of domain names and Internet Protocol addresses.

The Working Group played a central role in the December 2012 launch of the Global Alliance against Child Sexual Abuse Online, a coalition of over 50 countries that have come together to actively combat, reduce, and prosecute child sexual abuse and exploitation online. The U.S. will take over the chairmanship of the Global Alliance in 2014, and plans are underway for a follow on conference later this year.

Information Society Dialogue (ISD)

The ISD ensures the coordination of an on-going working relationship between the USG and EU on important communication and information policy issues. ISD discussions typically include overarching issues such as internet governance, as well as a specific focus on cross-border data flows/cloud computing, data protection/data privacy, wireless spectrum management, broadband rollout, research and development cooperation, and 3rd-country market access issues.

ITU drives global effort to strengthen cybersecurity

Source – ITU:

ITU drives global effort to strengthen cybersecurity
Global index measures national cybersecurity resilience
Dubai, 2 April 2014 – ITU presented the Global Cybersecurity Index (GCI), a unique initiative launched by ITU and ABI Research to measure the levels of cybersecurity in countries, at a forum held in Dubai today. It underlies ITU’s commitment to strengthening cybersecurity and plugging the gaps worldwide while building capacity at the national level, particularly in developing countries.
The long term aim is to drive further efforts in the adoption and integration of cybersecurity on a global scale. A comparison of national cybersecurity strategies will reveal those countries with high rankings in specific areas, and consequently highlight lesser known – yet successful – cybersecurity strategies.
Based on questionnaire responses received by ITU Member States, a first analysis of cybersecurity development in the Arab region was compiled and one for the Africa region is under way. The objective is to release a global status of cybersecurity for 2014.
“Greater connectivity also brings with it greater risk,” said ITU Secretary-General Hamadoun I. Touré. “As our physical and cyber worlds overlap, there is an increased need to address the related challenges of ensuring security, human rights, rule of law, good governance and economic development.”
“In embracing technological progress, cybersecurity must form an integral and invisible part of that process,” said Brahima Sanou, Director of ITU’s Telecommunication Development Bureau addressing the forum. “Unfortunately, cybersecurity is not yet at the core of many national and industrial technology strategies.”
The goal of the GCI is to help foster a global culture of cybersecurity and its integration at the core of information and communication technologies. “Countries need to be aware of their current capability level in cybersecurity and, at the same time, identify areas where cybersecurity needs to be enhanced,” Sanou stressed.
The forum on Measuring Countries’ Readiness and Build Capacity on Cybersecurity was held at ITU’s World Telecommunication Development Conference that opened in Dubai on 30 March and will be in session until 10 April.
Media Accreditation
Media accreditation for WTDC-14 is compulsory. Please see: www.itu.int/en/newsroom/wtdc-14/Pages/media-accreditation.aspx
Media-relevant videos can be accessed at the WTDC-14 Newsroom: http://bit.ly/1jXuGP5 – http://bit.ly/1mojk3Z
The Report is available at: www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Cybersecurity/Pages/GCI.aspx
Photos are available at: www.flickr.com/photos/itupictures

European Parliament legislative resolution of 2 April 2014 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 64/432/EEC as regards computer databases which are part of the surveillance networks in the Member States (COM(2011)0524 – C7-0229/2011 – 2011/0228(COD))

Source – EU Parliament:

European Parliament legislative resolution of 2 April 2014 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 64/432/EEC as regards computer databases which are part of the surveillance networks in the Member States (COM(2011)0524 – C7-0229/2011 – 2011/0228(COD)) (Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament ,

– having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2011)0524),

– having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 43(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7-0229/2011),

– having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

– having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 7 December 2011(1) ,

– having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 10 July 2013 to approve Parliament’s position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

– having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

– having regard to the report of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety and the opinion of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development (A7-0201/2012),

1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

(1) OJ C 43, 15.2.2012, p. 64.

FACT SHEET: The Administration’s Proposal for Ending the Section 215 Bulk Telephony Metadata Program

Source – The White House (see also the President’s Statement):

The White House
Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release March 27, 2014
FACT SHEET: The Administration’s Proposal for Ending the Section 215 Bulk Telephony Metadata Program

On January 17, 2014, President Obama gave a speech at the Department of Justice on his Administration’s review of certain intelligence activities. During this speech, he ordered a transition that would end the Section 215 bulk telephony metadata program as it previously existed and establish a new mechanism to preserve the capabilities we need without the government holding this bulk metadata. The President made clear that he was ordering this transition to give the public greater confidence that their privacy is appropriately protected, while maintaining the tools our intelligence and law enforcement agencies need to keep us safe. This fact sheet describes the steps the Administration has taken to implement this transition, details the President’s proposal for a new program to replace the Section 215 program, and outlines the steps the Administration will be taking in the near future to realize the President’s vision.

Ending the Section 215 Bulk Telephony Metadata Program as it Existed

On January 17, 2014, the President directed the first step in the transition of the Section 215 program; that the Department of Justice (DOJ) to seek to modify the program to ensure that:

Absent an emergency situation, the government can query the telephony metadata collected pursuant to the program only after a judge approves the use of specific numbers for such queries based on national security concerns; and
The results of any query are limited to metadata within two hops of the selection term being used, instead of three.
On February 5, 2014, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) approved the government’s request to modify the program.

The President’s Proposal to Replace the Section 215 Program

For the second step in the transition, the President instructed the Attorney General and the Intelligence Community (IC) to develop options for a new program that could match the capabilities and fill the gaps that the Section 215 metadata program was designed to address without the government holding the bulk telephony metadata records. The President further instructed the Attorney General and the IC to report back to him with options for alternative approaches before the program comes up for reauthorization by the FISC on March 28th.

Consistent with this directive, DOJ and the IC developed options designed to meet the criteria the President laid out in his speech — to preserve the capabilities we need without the government holding this metadata. The Administration has also consulted with Congress, the private sector, privacy and civil liberties groups, and other interested groups.

On the basis of these consultations, and after having carefully considered the available options, the President has decided on a proposal that will, with the passage of appropriate legislation, allow the government to end bulk collection of telephony metadata records under Section 215, while ensuring that the government has access to the information it needs to meet its national security requirements. Under the President’s proposal, a new program would be created with the following key attributes:

the government will not collect these telephone records in bulk; rather, the records would remain at the telephone companies for the length of time they currently do today;
absent an emergency situation, the government would obtain the records only pursuant to individual orders from the FISC approving the use of specific numbers for such queries, if a judge agrees based on national security concerns;
the records provided to the government in response to queries would only be within two hops of the selection term being used, and the government’s handling of any records it acquires will be governed by minimization procedures approved by the FISC;
the court-approved numbers could be used to query the data over a limited period of time without returning to the FISC for approval, and the production of records would be ongoing and prospective; and
the companies would be compelled by court order to provide technical assistance to ensure that the records can be queried and that results are transmitted to the government in a usable format and in a timely manner.
The President believes that this approach will best ensure that we have the information we need to meet our intelligence requirements while enhancing public confidence in the manner in which this information is collected and held.

The Path Forward

Legislation will be needed to implement the President’s proposal. The Administration has been in consultation with congressional leadership and members of the Intelligence and Judiciary Committees on this important issue throughout the last year, and we look forward to continuing to work with Congress to pass a bill that achieves the goals the President has put forward. Given that this legislation will not be in place by March 28 and given the importance of maintaining the capabilities in question, the President has directed DOJ to seek from the FISC a 90-day reauthorization of the existing program, which includes the substantial modifications in effect since February.