The EU Data Protection Reform
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Background paper N° 2 January 2015 The EU Data Protection Reform © Clearswift The European Commission has published in 2012 a proposal for a new legal framework for the protection of personal data in the EU. The European Parliament and the Council of the EU are now working on the proposal, composed of a Regulation and a Directive. The reform could have important consequences for sport organisations, especially with regard to the fight against doping and match-fixing, which requires the collection and transfer of sensitive data. 1. The EU Data Protection Reform – general state of play 2. Impact on sport 3. Analysis of most relevant topics for sport and recommendations The European Commission has published in 2012 a proposal for a new legal framework for the protection of personal data in the EU (the existing Directive 95/46/EC dates back to 1995). The proposed framework consists of two legislative proposals: a Regulation on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (General Data Protection Regulation) and a Directive on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by competent authorities for the purposes of prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, and the free movement of such data. However, the specificity of sport, in particular its voluntary nature and its contribution to the public interest, has not been sufficiently taken into account in the Commission’s proposal. The reform could therefore jeopardise the capacity of sport organisations to effectively fight against doping and match-fixing if adequate provisions are not included. 1. The EU Data Protection Reform – general state of play January 2012 – Legislative proposals published by the European Commission October 2012 – Debate starts in Council October 2013 – Vote in LIBE committee (European Parliament) March 2014 – 1st reading position adopted by European Parliament December 2014 – Council has reached partial general approach on public sector provisions, rules on territorial scope, chapter IV, chapter V. However, the rule is nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. Spring 2015 - Trilogues are expected to start EP Rapporteurs General Data Protection Regulation Directive LIBE – Jan Philipp ALBRECHT (Greens, DE) LIBE – Marju LAURISTIN (S&D, EST) Shadows: EPP – Axel VOSS (DE) EPP – Axel VOSS (DE) S&D – Marju LAURISTIN (EST) Greens – Jan Philipp ALBRECHT (DE) ALDE – Sophia IN’T VELD (NL) ALDE – Sophia IN’T VELD (NL) ECR – Timothy KIRKHOPE (UK) ECR – Timothy KIRKHOPE (UK) GUE/NGL – Cornelia ERNST (DE) GUE/NGL – Cornelia ERNST (DE) 2 Opinion rapporteurs: EMPL– Nadja HIRSCH (ALDE, DE) JURI – Axel VOSS (EPP, DE) ITRE – Sean KELLY (EPP, IRL) IMCO – Lara COMI (EPP, IT) JURI – Marielle GALLO (EPP, FR) Council configuration : Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) 2. Impact on sport Sport organisations have implemented methods to fight against doping and match-fixing which require the transfer of sensitive data. The reform of personal data protection could make it more difficult to collect and transfer these sensitive data. Such a situation is highly paradoxical since European institutions repeatedly called upon sport organisations to take up their responsibility in fighting doping and match-fixing and in preserving the integrity of sport. 2.1. Calls on sport organisations to fight against doping and match-fixing The European institutions and the Council of Europe have repeatedly emphasized the need to fight more efficiently against doping and match-fixing, including through the exchange of information: - Council of Europe Convention on the Manipulation of Sports Competitions (CETS No. 215), July 2014, signed by 8 EU Member States already Recital: “Emphasizing that sports organisations bear the responsibility to detect and sanction the manipulation of sports competitions committed by persons under their authority” Article 7.1: “Each Party shall encourage sports organisations and competition organisers to adopt and implement rules to combat the manipulation of sports competitions (…)”. Article 12.1: “Without prejudice to Article 14, each Party shall facilitate, at national and international levels and in accordance with its domestic law, exchanges of information between the relevant public authorities, sports organisations, competition organisers, sports betting operators and national platforms. In particular, each Party shall undertake to set up mechanisms for sharing relevant information when such information might assist in the carrying out of the risk assessment referred to in Article 5 and namely the advanced provision of information about the types and object of the betting products to the competition organisers, and in initiating or carrying out investigations or proceedings concerning the manipulation of sports competitions.” Article 14.1: “Each Party shall adopt such legislative and other measures as may be necessary to ensure that all actions against the manipulation of sports competitions comply with relevant 3 national and international personal data protection laws and standards, particularly in the exchange of information covered by this Convention.” - European Commission’s Communication on the European dimension in sport, 18 January 2011 “EU action can help address transnational challenges encountered by sport in Europe such as a coordinated approach to the challenge of doping, fraud and match-fixing. “ - European Commission’s Communication “Towards a comprehensive European framework for online gambling”, 23 October 2012 “Match fixing runs contrary to the principle of fairness in sporting competitions, which is one of the objectives of EU action in the field of sport (Article 165 TFEU). Addressing the issue requires concerted and coordinated efforts from public authorities, sport organisations and gambling operators.” - European Parliament’s resolution on the European dimension in sport, 2 February 2012 Article 30: “Is in favour of greater harmonisation of legislation in order to achieve effective cooperation on the part of the police and the judiciary in the fight against doping and other kinds of manipulation of sports events” Article 86: “Calls on the European Commissions to tackle the opacity of transfers and match- fixing (…)”. - Council Conclusions on combating match-fixing, 28-29 November 2011 Article 2.1: “Match-fixing is besides doping one of the most significant threat to contemporary sport and damages the image of sport by jeopardizing the integrity and unpredictability of sporting competition.” Article 3.1: “Encourage close cooperation and information sharing between all interested stakeholders in order to combat match-fixing in an effective way (…)” 4 - Council Expert Group on good governance : deliverable on principles of good governance in sport, September 2013 “In the areas such as match fixing and doping, sporting bodies should continue to develop and apply relevant rules, codes of conduct and educational programmes for its participants and take other steps to minimise the prospect of misconduct by adopting sound financial management principles whilst governments should ensure that relevant laws are fit for purpose and the resources exist that enable law enforcement bodies to take appropriate action when required.” 2.2. The potential consequences of the reform on the fight against doping and match-fixing Certain elements in the current proposals create the risk of hindering the hosting of sports events in Europe, penalising European athletes wishing to participate in international competitions and jeopardising joint efforts to effectively fight doping and match-fixing. Furthermore, the current reform could have a negative impact on the fight against organised crime, particular linked to sport. Besides the organisation of sports events, the Olympic Sports Movement is responsible for the development of sport, from grassroots participation to elite competitions, and for the protection of the integrity of competitions against doping and match-fixing. These different activities may require the IOC, the EOC and other sports organisations to process personal data of athletes and other participants, for instance in the following cases: a) investigation of match-fixing cases linked to betting and or other breaches of the IOC Code of Ethics; b) anti-doping controls and investigations; c) accreditation of athletes and other participants to sport events such as the Olympic Games, European Games and Youth Olympic Games; d) sale of tickets to sport events of such as Olympic Games and European Games; e) management and transfer of competitions results; f) communication of athletes’ biographies to media organisations; g) coordination of various projects for the development of sport and the promotion of Olympic values; h) conservation of archives for the legacy of the Olympic Movement. If the new legal framework on data protection does not take into account the specificities of sport, it would create major obstacles to carry out essential activities by the IOC and other sports organisations. The Data Protection Regulation should thus be applied in respect of the principle of sports’ specificity as guaranteed by Article 165 TFEU. 5 3. Analysis of most relevant topics for sport and recommendations The proposed Regulation details in which cases the processing of personal data is lawful (article 6): - Consent given by the data subject - Necessary for the performance of a contract to which the