Tehran, YJC. EU Commission spokeswoman says that the EU must take legislative steps to avoid being victim to espionage such as the PRISM program.
An Iranian news website (LHVnews) has conducted an
interview with the EU Commission Spokeswoman Mina Andreeva, of which the full
text follows.
Q:
How do you evaluate this scandal (United States spying on Europe)? How is it
possible that the US can do this work without European Countries awareness?
A: The Commission has made it very
clear: The Commission expects clarity and transparency from partners and
allies, and this is what we expect from our United States partners. Discussions
on a future free trade agreement with the U.S. will only advance in parallel
with discussions on data protection.
Q:
Mrs. Reding recently said the recent scandal was a "wake up call”, what did she
mean from this phrase?
A: Vice-President Reding said that the
PRISM scandal has been a wake-up call for Europe and the data protection reform
is the answer. For her, what the PRISM scandal shows is that we need strong
data protection rules for Europe in order to regain the trust of citizens, to
protect their privacy and to be credible vis-a-vis our American partners. It’s
time that governments and the European Parliament show their commitment to
protecting citizens’ data and adopt the EU's data protection reform swiftly so
citizens can benefit from it in their everyday lives.
Q:
How can we explain US spying in terms of justice and privacy?
A: It is clear the American and European
conceptions of privacy and data protection differ. In Europe, data protection
is a fundamental right, protected by the EU Treaties and enshrined in our
Charter of Fundamental Rights. This is not the case across the Atlantic.
This means that EU citizens do not
benefit from the same rights in the US as US citizens. For example, in Europe,
American citizens can seek redress before a court if they feel their data
protection rights have been violated. In the US, EU citizens do not have the same
right of redress.
Q:
Does EU have any specified policy to confront US aggressive policies?
A: As soon as she heard the news stories
about PRISM, Vice-President Reding wrote to Attorney General Eric Holder on 10
June requesting a full and immediate clarification on the matter. She then met
Attorney General Holder in Dublin on 14 June where he already provided some
explanations and agreed to set up a transatlantic group of experts to discuss
these issues and the implications for the protection of EU citizens' personal
data. This group will meet on Monday (23 July) again.
In the meantime, we are working to
reinforce our data protection rules in Europe. The Commission put a proposal
for a reform of EU data protection rules on the table in January 2012 already.
These rules will notably provide legal clarity on data transfers: when US
authorities want to access the data of EU citizens outside US territory they
have to use a legal framework that involves judicial control. Asking the
companies directly is illegal. This is public international law.
They will also make it clear that
non-European companies, when offering goods and services to European consumers,
will have to apply the EU data protection law in full. And we will have tough
sanctions to make sure they do – up to 2% of a company's global annual
turnover.
At the Informal Justice Council in
Vilnius today, Vice-President Reding also announced the Commission is working
on a solid assessment of the Safe Harbour Agreement which we will present
before the end of the year. The Agreement could be a loophole for data
transfers because it allows data transfers from EU to US companies – although
US data protection standards are lower than our European ones.
Q:
If Edward Snowden applies asylum request to a European Country, will EU accept
the request?
A: That would really be a question for
the Member States. Mr. Snowden's role in all this is not the real issue at
stake. What the debate around PRISM really shows is that a clear legal
framework for the protection of personal data is not a luxury or constraint but
a necessity.