DR-Action-Plan
The coming weeks give an excellent window of opportunity to influence the report evaluating the data retention directive. So this is the time to set the tone and launch a lot of critique.
Please find a list of actions below which you are welcome to edit. We need to divide the workload, so please write where you can help.
Data protection institutions
The Commission can ignore us, but can't ignore the art. 29 WP and the EDPS. We need strong messages from those institutions, denouncing blanket retention. When approaching the Art 29 WG, we should point out that their technical and unambitious review is being used politically to ignore critics. It would make sense to write them a letter.
Status:
- Joe is in touch with the EDPS
- Kasia will draft a letter to the Article 29 Working Party
Can you help?
Letters from Member States that haven't implemented
We need letters to the Commission from MS that haven't implemented the directive, saying that a 'pressing social need' for DR is lacking, i.e. that their law enforcement effort has been functioning good without DR measures in place.
We need attention within the Commission for this particular issue. Letters from activits in countries that haven't implemented DR to their commissioners should do the trick. Those letters would express concern that the barrier for justifying surveillance measures (i.c. DR) seems to be lowering from 'necessary in a democratic society' to 'proportionate'.
Also parliamentary questions from MEPs of those countries would be useful, asking questions like "If law enforcement in ... is working well without data retention, why does the Commission still want to force all Member States to adopt blanket retention legislation?"
Status:
Can you help?
Press coverage
We need to demonstrate that the anti-DR movement is not only big, but influential. We need a lot of press coverage and critical articles - especially in the countries that haven't implemented DR. Those articles should also appear in the media that are read by the constituencies of the single Commissioners: Sweden, Britain, Netherlands (Kroes for example is a liberal, The Dutch Financial Times or NRC Handelsblad suffices).
Status:
Can you help?
Evaluation standards
We need to reach consensus on what the absolute minimum standards are for the evaluation by the Commission, i.e. how the subcriteria for the 'necessary in a democratic society' test should be fulfilled. This could be achieved through a memo by a well-known criminologist.
Status:
- Axel has not yet found a criminologist willing to write a paper to this effect in the Netherlands.
Can you help?
FAQ
We need a FAQ on the most common arguments surrounding DR, so that activists, journalists, politicians, 'we' speak the same language.
Status:
- FAQ has been drafted here by Patrick. I feel the draft still needs some work to its language and may also be too long in parts. Please help to improve it directly in the wiki, and to add other frequently asked questions if you have any.
Can you help?
Official assessments of proportionality
What I think would be useful to have the institutions legal services assess those questions, particularly with regard to the ECtHR and Romanian judgement, and use possible negative assessments politically.
Status:
- Patrick asked Alexander Alvaro in this regard; the European Parliament legal service cannot be used by individual MEPs however.
Can you help?
Own proposal
The Commission has no clue to proceed, we need to provide an elegant exit route. A joint proposal with industry would make our position more attractive.
Status:
- Patrick proposed an industry meeting with EuroISPA member eco in Germany. The request is pending.
Can you help?
S&D support
The support of the S&D fraction in Parliament will be crucial to reach a majority. Has anybody got useful contacts and can you talk to them?
Status:
Can you help?