When one tracks the very basis for Privacy and shortly later on Data Protection rights and law in the European Union, one need only look to the aftermath of World War II the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in 1948; and in 1950 the ECHR.
Data protection coming in the 1970s with the German State of Hesse adopting the first DP law, followed by Sweden in 1973 and FR, DE, NL and UK in the 1980s. The COE adopting Convention 108 in 1981.
As the world has watched the erosion of rights and the rule of law under Trump and the mendacious Brexit project obsessives in the Tory party in the main, the import of such rights cannot be understated.
I had a double take at the headline of Mairead’s piece, not because it was designed to catch my attention, but more because of what we’ve all seen emerge in the US, data harvesting projects and ancillary issues associated with the modern world.
You can bolt the word ‘cyber-‘ on to pretty much anything but the underlying behaviours, conditions and, let’s face it, wholesale abuses are not really any different. Perhaps, all heightened by immediate access.
Concessions to human frailty, populist, or just plain wrong?!
The final passage of @maireadenright piece is really important. Existing practice ....
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Any amendment should cater for scenarios where the child is possibly a stranger to the accused. Side step guarded anonymity and possible jigsaw identification from pre charge reporting. This is tricky, but this draft seems to work.
I see that @SenatorMcDowell also has an amendment that also makes some sensible suggestions.
On every side of a case there is a right, a believed truth, and a position. In many instances the only way to resolve who is actually right in fact or at law, is to litigate the particular issue.
Litigation comes with great burdens. Two such burdens (and there are many more) being cost and the exposure of matters and people in open court that ordinarily may not wish for such outings. Take for example a defamation, injury, or a tragic loss.
Courts too, are not infallible. So, often the most complicated of cases only become resolved at appellate level, and where matters of European Union law arise that are not so obvious or clear, they must be referred to the Court of Justice in Luxembourg.
This Thursday sees judgment in Facebook Ireland and Schrems in
Case C-311/18 at 09:30 CET.
The case was controversial for a number of reasons. First, SCCs - Standard Contractual Clauses, the now outdated clauses that undertakings can use for cross border data flows Decision 2010/87; and
Second, Privacy Shield. Which is an agreement between the US and EU from July 2016 concerning data transfers.