Articles for tag: COVID-19DatenschutzPrivatsphäre

Using Location Data to Control the Coronavirus Pandemic

In times of crisis like the Coronavirus pandemic strong and decisive measures to save the lives and livelihoods of people across all parts of the world are needed. There is an increased need for governments to monitor and control the public, which might make it necessary to limit individual freedom. The use of location data to control the coronavirus pandemic can be fruitful and might improve the ability of governments and research institutions to combat the threat more quickly. However, the use of data on such scale has consequences for data protection, privacy and informational self-determination.

The Judgment That Will Be Forgotten

On September 24 2019, the ECJ delivered its judgment in Google vs CNIL (C-517/17) which was expected to clarify the territorial scope of the ‘right to be forgotten’. In fact, the ECJ’s decision is disappointing in several respects. The Court does not only open the door to fragmentation in European data protection law but also fails to further develop the protection of individual rights in the digital age.

Der virtuelle Mr. Hyde

Heute vor einem Jahr brannte es in Zelle 143 der JVA Kleve. Darin eingeschlossen war der junge Syrer Amad A., der wenige Tage später seinen Verbrennungen und Vergiftungen erlag. Amad A. war am 6. Juli 2018 von der Polizei in Geldern festgenommen und darauf inhaftiert worden. Die Inhaftierung erfolgte aufgrund eines Haftbefehls, mit dem der Malier Amedy G. gesucht wurde. Amad A. befand sich fälschlicherweise in Haft und kam auf grässliche Weise ums Leben. Der Fall verdeutlicht die Risiken im Umgang mit polizeilichen Datenbanken.

Where Citizenship Law and Data Protection Law Converge

Becoming a citizen of a country is a noteworthy event. But in light of increasing concerns over the protection of personal data, states face questions regarding the necessity of formal publication of the personal data of their new citizens. A closer look at Member States' practices reveals radical discrepancies between the national approaches taken across the EU.

Interoperability of Databases and Interstate Trust: a Perilous Combination for Fundamental Rights

On 14 May 2019, the Council adopted two regulations, Regulation 2019/817 and Regulation 2019/818, establishing a framework for the interoperability between EU information systems in the Area of Freedom, Security, and Justice. The new rules on interoperability, upon which the European Parliament agreed in April 2019, will allegedly provide for easier information sharing and ‘considerably improve security in the EU, allow for more efficient checks at external borders, improve detection of multiple identities and help prevent and combat illegal migration’. All this, according to the press release of the Council, ‘while safeguarding fundamental rights’. It is questionable whether this commitment made by the EU legislator is justified.

Die Zeugen Jehovas und das Datenschutzrecht

Scheinbar geht es nur um eine Petitesse in dem Streitfall der EuGH-Rechtssache C-25/17. Vordergründig geht es um die kleine Frage, ob die Zeugen Jehovas als Religionsgemeinschaft bei Hausbesuchen den besonderen Bestimmungen des europäischen Datenschutzrechts unterliegen. Doch wie zu zeigen sein wird, geht es um mehr, um wichtige Fragen des europäischen Datenschutzrechts und seiner Anwendbarkeit generell sowie um die Reichweite für den gesamten kirchlichen Bereich.

Who Controls a Facebook Page?

Days after the General Data Protection Regulation has entered into force, data protection and social networks are in the news again: Last Tuesday, the ECJ has decided that the administrator of a Facebook page is jointly responsible, along with Facebook itself, for processing personal data of Facebook users and persons visiting the page hosted on Facebook via web tracking.