Right to be Forgotten
From the Polish Sejm, Rizzared Kalisz and Andrzej Gałaśewski . respond. The former believes that there are still many gaps in the proposals, for example to prevent the misuse of personal data by non-democratic regimes. Also criticize imprecise wording in the regulation, for example with a view to the right to be forgot and the duty to inform third part.
According to Kalisz, the definition of “third part” is insufficiently elaborate to satisfy in a time when link are establish within a split second. Gałaśewski says the Sejm has organized a consultation among parliamentarians, companies and experts, showing support for the idea of a one-stop shoppable. He emphasizes that the draft regulation does not provide sufficient protection for sensitive data, for example health data.
Also read: right to be forgotten help
Then Sharon get Gesthuizenon behalf of the House of Representatives and she ask Le Bail why the line chosen to exclude SMEs base on the number of employee, while small company can also have to deal with data processing of many people. Le Bail indicates that the criterion of 250 FTE concerns the widely supported European definition for an SME. For SMEs, certain obligations under the Regulation do not apply, but they must comply with its principles.
The fact that small company sometime process very sensitive data is fully recognize in the draft regulation, according to Le Bail. Finally, Cypriot MEP Kyriacos Triantaphyllides(GUE-NGL) took the floor and he stated that there is currently a need in the European Parliament for a clear legal framework with one instrument. He therefore regrets that there are two instruments, a regulation and a directive. When ask why the Council has opt for separate treatment of the two instrument, he receive the meaningless answer that the draft directive and the draft regulation are two measure that are dealt with in tandem.
Session II – Harmonized and strengthened data protection rights and principles for an interconnected world
The second session of the conference will be chair by the rapporteur for the draft regulation, the German MEP Jan Philipp Albrecht (EGP-EFTA). He quickly gives the floor to the first speaker, indicating that as rapporteur he has sufficient space to comment on the new regulations.
Marietta Karamanli, Vice-President of the Commission for European Affairs of the French Assemblée National, emphasizes that the regulation will have direct effect in the Member States and therefore have more impact at Member State level than a directive. She expresses the hope that the regulation will increase the level of protection and better protect the privacy of citizens. The Assembly has a number of caveats and the speaker lists the various topics.
Also read: help with right to be forgotten
Right to be Forgot
First of all, for example, with regard to the right to be forgot, especially with regard to data that children have put online, which article need further elaboration. The text on the responsibility of companies for the data they use should also be clarified. The aim of the regulation is to improve the rights of the individual and to guarantee these rights. She further emphasizes the importance of clear and understandable communication. Between the individual and the data processor and the importance of explicit consent.
The proposals make processors and controllers responsible for guaranteeing. Citizens’ rights and the regulation provides for sanctions if they fail to comply. To this end, it is important to identify who owns data, said Karamanli. The Assembly supports the proposed procedures and mechanisms. For individuals to enforce their right and is commute to educating citizen to use data wisely.
The Assemblée’s commitment to regulatory enforcement is evidence by the call for closer cooperation. Between national regulator while preserving independence, and identifying data processor and their headquarter to handle complaint. Karamanli proposes a pilot to test whether the proposed regulators’ system works. Effectively in the case of complaints from individual citizens whose data may also reside in multiple countries. Two further important weaknesses are the large amount of delegated powers and the exception of Europol and other EU institutions.
Karamanli conclude by stating that the new proposals represent progress on a large number of points. But that substantial improvements are still need that the European Commission needs to work on further. Two further important weaknesses are the large amount of delegated powers and the exception of Europol and other EU institutions. Karamanli concludes by stating that the new proposal represent progress. On a large number of points but that substantial improvement. Are still need that the European Commission needs to work on further.
Two further important weaknesses are the large amount of delegated powers and the exception of Europol and other EU institutions. Karamanli concludes by stating that the new proposals represent progress. On a large number of points but that substantial improvement are still need. That the European Commission needs to work on further.
Also read: gdpr case studies