EU-US air data row hots up

European Parliament lawyers have “abused” their role by pressuring a committee to back a controversial EU-US air data deal, claims an Italian MEP.

The claim by Radical MEP Marco Cappato follows votes by the parliament’s legal affairs committee to take a Trans-Atlantic anti-terror agreement to the EU courts.

MEPs voted 21 to ten to challenge a European Commission ruling that the transfer of EU air passenger data to US security agencies ‘adequate’ within Europe’s privacy laws.

A second case recommended by the committee, 19 to 14 votes, will seek to overturn a signed deal between national governments and the EU.

Votes took place after a 25-minute intervention from the parliament’s legal service which is concerned over juridical basis for the case.

Cappato believes the lawyer was acting politically and speaking “more on political grounds than legal grounds”.

“The legal service made a very political speech, abusing his role,” said the MEP.

The Italian Radical – who does not know if he will be back in a new assembly following the weekend’s European elections – is urging parliament party bosses to back a court challenge.

He told EUpolitix that political fixers should not “hide behind” a new parliament.

“If something is right, you have to it. There is urgency here,” Cappato said.

“Illegal data exchanges have been taking place for a year and a half. If we accept it we lose our sovereignty to make privacy law.”

Senior MEPs will debate the calls for a legal challenge to the air data transfers – a deal was signed in Washington two weeks ago.

US ‘homeland security’ chief Tom Ridge and EU ambassador Günter Burghardt put their signatures to an agreement on May 28 despite parliament's claim MEPs had not been properly consulted.

MEPs have rejected Washington assurances that transfers of computerised information - including email addresses, phone numbers and credit card details – will respect EU privacy law.

Brussels snubbed MEPs on May 17 giving the OK to controversial handovers of EU air passenger data to US security agencies.

The commission ruled the transfers of computerised booking information 'adequate' under EU privacy law; Europe's foreign ministers then rubberstamped the agreement to give legal cover for exchanges that have been in place for over a year.

America and the European Commission are insisting that the agreement balances data protection law and the needs of the post-September war on terror.
Washington is optimistic that the EU-US deal can survive a challenge in the European courts.

“Teams of legal experts on both sides looked completely at the agreement before it was signed,” a US official told EUpolitix.

“We are confident that we have an agreement that will withstand any legal challenge."

European officials also claim that the commission’s own legal advice is strongly in favour of the deal – dismissing argument that a parliament court case would suspend transfers.

Liberal leader Graham Watson is tabling a call for action. “The European Parliament has been left with only one choice: asking the ECJ to throw out the PNR deal. This is not just a question of protecting the prerogatives of the European Parliament, but it is most importantly a question of protecting our citizens' right to privacy."

Greens and Socialists are also backing the European Court of Justice challenge, a situation that, sources say, makes a legal fight “almost inevitable”.

“These decisions of the council [of ministers] and commission are all the more unacceptable as parliament has called for basic protection in data transfer on no less than four occasions,” said Socialist group coordinator, Anna Terron I Cusi.

“It is totally unacceptable for the EU to adopt legislation which may be legitimate for the US but which overrules the position of the European Parliament."

But the parliament’s largest political grouping, the centre-right EPP, with the support of some Socialist national delegations backs the data deal.

And recent European elections may give parliament chief Pat Cox room to defer debate and hold a new vote – the fourth - in a new-look assembly.

• Previous article
• Next article