Keyword: Privacy

Is the Human Rights Framework Still Fit for the Big Data Era? A Discussion of the ECtHR’s Case Law on Privacy Violations Arising from Surveillance Activities external link

van der Sloot, B.
2015

Abstract

Human rights protect humans. This seemingly uncontroversial axiom might become quintessential over time, especially with regard to the right to privacy. Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights grants natural persons> a right to complain, in order to protect their individual interests, such as those related to personal freedom, human dignity and individual autonomy. With Big Data processes, however, individuals are mostly unaware that their personal data are gathered and processed and even if they are, they are often unable to substantiate their specific individual interest in these large data gathering systems. When the European Court of Human Rights assesses these types of cases, mostly revolving around (mass) surveillance activities, it finds itself stuck between the human rights framework on the one hand and the desire to evaluate surveillance practices by states on the other. Interestingly, the Court chooses to deal with these cases under Article 8 ECHR, but in order to do so, it is forced to go beyond the fundamental pillars of the human rights framework.

Big data, conventionality, Grondrechten, Human rights, individual harm, mass surveillance, Privacy, societal interest

Bibtex

Other{nokey, title = {Is the Human Rights Framework Still Fit for the Big Data Era? A Discussion of the ECtHR’s Case Law on Privacy Violations Arising from Surveillance Activities}, author = {van der Sloot, B.}, url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/1701.pdf}, year = {1215}, date = {2015-12-15}, abstract = {Human rights protect humans. This seemingly uncontroversial axiom might become quintessential over time, especially with regard to the right to privacy. Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights grants natural persons> a right to complain, in order to protect their individual interests, such as those related to personal freedom, human dignity and individual autonomy. With Big Data processes, however, individuals are mostly unaware that their personal data are gathered and processed and even if they are, they are often unable to substantiate their specific individual interest in these large data gathering systems. When the European Court of Human Rights assesses these types of cases, mostly revolving around (mass) surveillance activities, it finds itself stuck between the human rights framework on the one hand and the desire to evaluate surveillance practices by states on the other. Interestingly, the Court chooses to deal with these cases under Article 8 ECHR, but in order to do so, it is forced to go beyond the fundamental pillars of the human rights framework.}, keywords = {Big data, conventionality, Grondrechten, Human rights, individual harm, mass surveillance, Privacy, societal interest}, }

Annotatie bij Hof van Justitie EU 16 juli 2015 (Coty / Stadtsparkasse) external link

van der Sloot, B.
European Human Rights Cases, num: 10, 2015

Bankgeheim, Bescherming van persoonsgegevens, Grondrechten, Privacy

Bibtex

Case note{nokey, title = {Annotatie bij Hof van Justitie EU 16 juli 2015 (Coty / Stadtsparkasse)}, author = {van der Sloot, B.}, url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/1698.pdf}, year = {1215}, date = {2015-12-15}, journal = {European Human Rights Cases}, number = {10}, keywords = {Bankgeheim, Bescherming van persoonsgegevens, Grondrechten, Privacy}, }

Book Review: Smart Technologies and the End(s) of Law external link

van der Sloot, B.
European Data Protection Law Review, num: 2, pp: 148-150., 2015

Grondrechten, Privacy

Bibtex

Other{nokey, title = {Book Review: Smart Technologies and the End(s) of Law}, author = {van der Sloot, B.}, url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/1697.pdf}, year = {1215}, date = {2015-12-15}, journal = {European Data Protection Law Review}, number = {2}, keywords = {Grondrechten, Privacy}, }

Open Data, Privacy, and Fair Information Principles: Towards a Balancing Framework external link

Zuiderveen Borgesius, F. & van Eechoud, M.
2015

Abstract

Open data are held to contribute to a wide variety of social and political goals, including strengthening transparency, public participation and democratic accountability, promoting economic growth and innovation, and enabling greater public sector efficiency and cost savings. However, releasing government data that contain personal information may threaten privacy and related rights and interests. In this paper we ask how these privacy interests can be respected, without unduly hampering benefits from disclosing public sector information. We propose a balancing framework to help public authorities address this question in different contexts. The framework takes into account different levels of privacy risks for different types of data. It also separates decisions about access and re-use, and highlights a range of different disclosure routes. A circumstance catalogue lists factors that might be considered when assessing whether, under which conditions, and how a dataset can be released. While open data remains an important route for the publication of government information, we conclude that it is not the only route, and there must be clear and robust public interest arguments in order to justify the disclosure of personal information as open data.

anonymous data, Big data, Data protection, fair information principles, Freedom of information, Grondrechten, OECD privacy Guidelines, Privacy, public sector data

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Open Data, Privacy, and Fair Information Principles: Towards a Balancing Framework}, author = {Zuiderveen Borgesius, F. and van Eechoud, M.}, url = {http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2695005}, year = {1203}, date = {2015-12-03}, abstract = {Open data are held to contribute to a wide variety of social and political goals, including strengthening transparency, public participation and democratic accountability, promoting economic growth and innovation, and enabling greater public sector efficiency and cost savings. However, releasing government data that contain personal information may threaten privacy and related rights and interests. In this paper we ask how these privacy interests can be respected, without unduly hampering benefits from disclosing public sector information. We propose a balancing framework to help public authorities address this question in different contexts. The framework takes into account different levels of privacy risks for different types of data. It also separates decisions about access and re-use, and highlights a range of different disclosure routes. A circumstance catalogue lists factors that might be considered when assessing whether, under which conditions, and how a dataset can be released. While open data remains an important route for the publication of government information, we conclude that it is not the only route, and there must be clear and robust public interest arguments in order to justify the disclosure of personal information as open data.}, keywords = {anonymous data, Big data, Data protection, fair information principles, Freedom of information, Grondrechten, OECD privacy Guidelines, Privacy, public sector data}, }

Reality tv, nieuwe kost voor de privacybescherming en het portretrecht external link

Schuijt, G.
NJB, num: 10, pp: 341-346., 1998

Abstract

Reality tv is een nieuw soort van televisieprogramma's. Slachtoffers van deze wijze van televisiemaken komen ongewild op de buis en voelen zich aangetast in hun persoonlijke levenssfeer. Andere slachtoffers geven toestemming tot uitzending van de opnamen maar krijgen daar later spijt van. Hoe reageert de rechtspraak op deze nieuwe problemen van privacybescherming en portretrecht? Hoe beoordeelt de rechter het werken met verborgen camera en hoe overvaljournalistiek? De rechter moet varen tussen de Scylla en de Charibdis van twee grondrechten, de vrijheid van de media en het recht op bescherming van de persoonlijke levenssfeer.

Grondrechten, Privacy

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Reality tv, nieuwe kost voor de privacybescherming en het portretrecht}, author = {Schuijt, G.}, url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/1679.pdf}, year = {0318}, date = {1998-03-18}, journal = {NJB}, number = {10}, abstract = {Reality tv is een nieuw soort van televisieprogramma's. Slachtoffers van deze wijze van televisiemaken komen ongewild op de buis en voelen zich aangetast in hun persoonlijke levenssfeer. Andere slachtoffers geven toestemming tot uitzending van de opnamen maar krijgen daar later spijt van. Hoe reageert de rechtspraak op deze nieuwe problemen van privacybescherming en portretrecht? Hoe beoordeelt de rechter het werken met verborgen camera en hoe overvaljournalistiek? De rechter moet varen tussen de Scylla en de Charibdis van twee grondrechten, de vrijheid van de media en het recht op bescherming van de persoonlijke levenssfeer.}, keywords = {Grondrechten, Privacy}, }

Safe Harbor 2.0 gedoemd te mislukken external link

Arnbak, A.
2015

Grondrechten, Privacy

Bibtex

Other{nokey, title = {Safe Harbor 2.0 gedoemd te mislukken}, author = {Arnbak, A.}, url = {https://www.axelarnbak.nl/2015/11/05/16e-column-financieele-dagblad-privacy-week-safe-harbor-2-0-gedoemd-te-mislukken/}, year = {1105}, date = {2015-11-05}, keywords = {Grondrechten, Privacy}, }

New Data Security Requirements and the Proceduralization of Mass Surveillance Law after the European Data Retention Case external link

Zuiderveen Borgesius, F. & Arnbak, A.
2015

Abstract

This paper discusses the regulation of mass metadata surveillance in Europe through the lens of the landmark judgment in which the Court of Justice of the European Union struck down the Data Retention Directive. The controversial directive obliged telecom and Internet access providers in Europe to retain metadata of all their customers for intelligence and law enforcement purposes, for a period of up to two years. In the ruling, the Court declared the directive in violation of the human rights to privacy and data protection. The Court also confirmed that the mere collection of metadata interferes with the human right to privacy. In addition, the Court developed three new criteria for assessing the level of data security required from a human rights perspective: security measures should take into account the risk of unlawful access to data, and the data’s quantity and sensitivity. While organizations that campaigned against the directive have welcomed the ruling, we warn for the risk of proceduralization of mass surveillance law. The Court did not fully condemn mass surveillance that relies on metadata, but left open the possibility of mass surveillance if policymakers lay down sufficient procedural safeguards. Such proceduralization brings systematic risks for human rights. Government agencies, with ample resources, can design complicated systems of procedural oversight for mass surveillance – and claim that mass surveillance is lawful, even if it affects millions of innocent people.

Data protection, data retention, GCHQ, Grondrechten, metadata, NSA, Privacy, security, Snowden, Surveillance, traffic data

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {New Data Security Requirements and the Proceduralization of Mass Surveillance Law after the European Data Retention Case}, author = {Zuiderveen Borgesius, F. and Arnbak, A.}, url = {http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2678860}, year = {1027}, date = {2015-10-27}, abstract = {This paper discusses the regulation of mass metadata surveillance in Europe through the lens of the landmark judgment in which the Court of Justice of the European Union struck down the Data Retention Directive. The controversial directive obliged telecom and Internet access providers in Europe to retain metadata of all their customers for intelligence and law enforcement purposes, for a period of up to two years. In the ruling, the Court declared the directive in violation of the human rights to privacy and data protection. The Court also confirmed that the mere collection of metadata interferes with the human right to privacy. In addition, the Court developed three new criteria for assessing the level of data security required from a human rights perspective: security measures should take into account the risk of unlawful access to data, and the data’s quantity and sensitivity. While organizations that campaigned against the directive have welcomed the ruling, we warn for the risk of proceduralization of mass surveillance law. The Court did not fully condemn mass surveillance that relies on metadata, but left open the possibility of mass surveillance if policymakers lay down sufficient procedural safeguards. Such proceduralization brings systematic risks for human rights. Government agencies, with ample resources, can design complicated systems of procedural oversight for mass surveillance – and claim that mass surveillance is lawful, even if it affects millions of innocent people.}, keywords = {Data protection, data retention, GCHQ, Grondrechten, metadata, NSA, Privacy, security, Snowden, Surveillance, traffic data}, }

Cloud services made in Europe after Snowden and Schrems external link

Irion, K.
2015

Grondrechten, Privacy

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Cloud services made in Europe after Snowden and Schrems}, author = {Irion, K.}, url = {http://policyreview.info/articles/news/cloud-services-made-europe-after-snowden-and-schrems/377}, year = {1027}, date = {2015-10-27}, keywords = {Grondrechten, Privacy}, }