EDPS - European Data Protection Supervisor’s Post

interface's Thorsten Wetzling was invited to a panel discussion by the EDPS - European Data Protection Supervisor titled: Zooming out onto democracy and the rule of law. How to build a functioning democratic oversight?   Discussing whether data protection alone is a sufficient safeguard when data is processed for national security purposes, the panel discussed among other aspects, the need for external oversight bodies to have autonomous access to the IT-systems and databases of the national security agencies and the need for oversight bodies to have binding powers.    You can watch the recording below

I must say, however much I was looking forward to this summit, the first half feels disappointing. On one hand, the topics are relevant, the experts are credible, professional, and competent, and this body represents the best hope for data privacy. But the politicization of discourse is distracting from the main issue at hand. How countries pass laws to regulate data should not concern this body, but rather providing secure tools to ensure transparency. Instead of including in the title of the event: ‘in a Democratic Society’, it should have been: ‘Rethinking Data’ only. First of all, politically significant words such as ‘Democratic Society’ are an unnecessary addendum to an already fraught political climate. It severely limits the potential cooperation from countries necessary for implementing universal legislation. Respecting individual countries' rights to protect ‘critical information infrastructure’ and ‘core data’ is a step towards achieving common goals. It is my belief that in regards to data privacy, political leaning should not be practiced, much less openly advertised, especially on a topic where trust is paramount. Also, on moral grounds, which this body stands to represent, the language itself is very exclusive. Referring to a state as a data security threat is a step away from referring to them as ‘enemies’ or specifically pointing out countries as not being democratic and a threat, or the need to protect ‘ourselves’ from ‘them’, thus further fueling the dividing discourse and setting sides. It is important to understand that ‘data ownership’, the core of this discussion, is not about loyalty, but about possession and ownership, two very different things. I could also argue that in today’s shifting political climate, old allies can become enemies, and foes friends. Are the sets of data we share ready to change ‘allegiances’, or should it rather be a simple question of resetting clearances? To summarize, the politicization of the issue undermines the bigger issue at hand, which is that there needs to be a clear slate on establishing several rules and definitions that can allow mass exchange of data while respecting individual and collective rights. This starts with an open dialogue to all. Each and every country, regardless of size, power, or political leaning, should have access to the same tools to protect and manage their citizens using a universal system of checks and balances that ensure fairness for all. This should be the key issue, and not some overlay field of influence. Hoping the second half will not be so polarized.

I. Stephanie Boyce FKC, FRSA: “As a country, we pride ourselves on our adherence to the rule of law and democratic accountability.”https://lnkd.in/dNgFa8iW a country, we pride ourselves on our adherence to the rule of law and democratic accountability; however, the recent riots saw the rule of law under attack. Further afield, geopolitical complexities and their potential impact starkly demonstrate the fragility of the rule of law on a global scale. Legal certainty and accessibility to the law are pillars upon which we have come to rely; however, without the appropriate safeguards in place, including significant investment in our public services, justice remains out of reach for too many, and the rule of law remains under constant threat. I invite you to […]Justice News247

I. Stephanie Boyce FKC, FRSA: “As a country, we pride ourselves on our adherence to the rule of law and democratic accountability.”https://lnkd.in/dNgFa8iW a country, we pride ourselves on our adherence to the rule of law and democratic accountability; however, the recent riots saw the rule of law under attack. Further afield, geopolitical complexities and their potential impact starkly demonstrate the fragility of the rule of law on a global scale. Legal certainty and accessibility to the law are pillars upon which we have come to rely; however, without the appropriate safeguards in place, including significant investment in our public services, justice remains out of reach for too many, and the rule of law remains under constant threat. I invite you to […]Justice News247

I. Stephanie Boyce FKC, FRSA: “As a country, we pride ourselves on our adherence to the rule of law and democratic accountability.”https://lnkd.in/dpv37u8m a country, we pride ourselves on our adherence to the rule of law and democratic accountability; however, the recent riots saw the rule of law under attack. Further afield, geopolitical complexities and their potential impact starkly demonstrate the fragility of the rule of law on a global scale. Legal certainty and accessibility to the law are pillars upon which we have come to rely; however, without the appropriate safeguards in place, including significant investment in our public services, justice remains out of reach for too many, and the rule of law remains under constant threat. I invite you to […]Justice News247

I. Stephanie Boyce FKC, FRSA: “As a country, we pride ourselves on our adherence to the rule of law and democratic accountability.”https://lnkd.in/dpv37u8m a country, we pride ourselves on our adherence to the rule of law and democratic accountability; however, the recent riots saw the rule of law under attack. Further afield, geopolitical complexities and their potential impact starkly demonstrate the fragility of the rule of law on a global scale. Legal certainty and accessibility to the law are pillars upon which we have come to rely; however, without the appropriate safeguards in place, including significant investment in our public services, justice remains out of reach for too many, and the rule of law remains under constant threat. I invite you to […]Justice News247

Plausible and longstanding responses to deformation of democracy include: i) neutral competence, ii) patience, iii) reliance on ethical codes, iv) whistleblowing, v) exiting one's position and vi) ’guerrilla government’ (O'Leary 2010). Bozeman et al. (2024) suggest institutionalized collective action. Their advantages and disadvantages are listed below.

The 2024 rule of law report shows how, even in countries with strong democratic traditions, press freedom is not an acquis and repeated violations risk escalating into a systemic crisis. At a time when media freedom principles are increasingly deteriorating across Europe, it is more necessary than ever for the rule of law report to be critical, specific, and linked to enforcement tools. https://lnkd.in/d4azax54

The European Commission is tackling the spread of online #disinformation and #misinformation to ensure the protection of European values and democratic systems. #Disinformation is false or misleading content that is spread with an intention to deceive or secure economic or political gain, and which may cause public harm. #Misinformation is false or misleading content shared without harmful intent though the effects can be still harmful. Check it out the European Commission's initiatives developed to tackle disinformation https://lnkd.in/e8V6yDab