Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

EU Commissioner Jourová Speaks Before European Parliament About Schrems’ Impact on Safe Harbor Negotiations

By Yves Melin on October 27, 2015
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

On October 26, 2015, EU Commissioner Jourová, responsible for data protection, delivered before the European Parliament a speech on the implications of the Schrems ruling (C‑362/14) by the Court of Justice of the EU, which declared as “invalid” the Safe Harbor Decision (European Commission’s Decision 2000/520/EC of 26 July 2000 “on the adequacy of the protection provided by the safe harbor privacy principles and related frequently asked questions issued by the US Department of Commerce”).

In her speech, Commissioner Jourová is hinting at the type of changes to the Safe Harbor that the EU Commission is trying to achieve in the ongoing negotiations with the U.S. authorities, in the wake of Schrems.

First, the EU Commission is not trying to have the U.S. adopt data protection rules identical to those in force in the EU. The U.S. legal system must offer safeguards that are globally equivalent to the ones of the EU. These safeguards do not necessarily need to be identical.

Second, a system such as the Safe Harbor that is based on “self-certification” is acceptable provided there are “effective detection and supervision mechanisms.” The old, purely self-regulating system will be transformed into an oversight system that is more responsive and proactive. It will give national data protection authorities a more active and visible role. Enforcement will have to be effective, with deterring sanctions.

Third, the adequacy decision will be periodically reviewed in light of developments of how Safe Harbor works in practice. An annual joint review mechanism will cover all aspects of the functioning of the new framework, including the use of exemptions for law enforcement and on national security grounds.

Fourth, intervention of public authorities, in particular for reasons of law enforcement and national security, will have to be subject to clear conditions and limitations. The access or use of personal data on a “generalized basis” must be prevented and sufficiently controlled by the judicial power.

An explanatory communication on the consequences of the Schrems ruling and setting out guidance on international data transfers will be released by the EU Commission shortly.

Photo of Yves Melin Yves Melin

Yves Melin is a Belgian international trade and customs lawyer concentrating in trade remedies (anti-dumping measures, countervailing measures and safeguards), customs laws and procedures, export controls, conflict minerals, illegal logging; and WTO dispute settlement. Yves also handles files for our U.S. and international…

Yves Melin is a Belgian international trade and customs lawyer concentrating in trade remedies (anti-dumping measures, countervailing measures and safeguards), customs laws and procedures, export controls, conflict minerals, illegal logging; and WTO dispute settlement. Yves also handles files for our U.S. and international clients in a wide range of EU regulatory matters, and in particular in the fields of data protection, life sciences, food security, energy and environmental laws.

Read more about Yves MelinEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Privacy and Cybersecurity
  • Blog:
    Password Protected
  • Organization:
    McGuireWoods LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo