28 March 2012
Support our work: become a Friend of Statewatch from as little as £1/€1 per month.
EU-US passenger
name record (PNR) deal - where now?
On Wednesday 21 April the European Parliament voted
to refer the proposed EU-US deal to formalise the handing over
of passenger details to the European Court of Justice for its
Opinion: see: Report on
vote
A US official told EurActiv.com that the US is not going to stop requesting airlines to transfer data and that the Parliament's vote is detrimental to airlines, which are left in a limbo transferring passenger data without a proper legal basis. He said: "the US and the Commission have come to an agreement on airline passenger data that protects the security and privacy of all travellers, Europeans as well as Americans. We regret the Parliament narrowly decided to refer the agreement to ECJ in an advisory vote. The US will continue to work with the Commission and the Irish Council Presidency to implement the agreement".
However, the issue is not that simple as the court's Opinion will be binding. The parliament are requesting an opinion by the Court of Justice according to Article 300(6) EC Treaty. This article contains a specific provision on the right of the European institutions and the member states to refer an "envisaged" international agreement to the court in order for the court to determine if the agreement would be "compatible with the provisions of this treaty", that is, lawful under Community law (Under the Nice Treaty the parliament got equal rights with the other institutions and the member states to request such an opinion.) There is a specific procedure in the Courts Rules of Procedure for dealing with such requests - without hearings, etc.
The rationale behind the provision is that things tend to become complicated from the point of view of international law, if an international agreement has been concluded by two or more parties, one of which subsequently declares that it cannot be lawfully bound by the agreement.
Therefore, concluding the agreement without waiting for the
court's opinion could place both the Council and the European
Commission in an embarrassing position. If the Council takes
the decision to conclude the agreement before the court had delivered
its opinion, then the European Parliament could challenge that
decision under Article 230 EC - and if the agreement is deemed
incompatible with Community law - it would be a legal nightmare.
Sor full background see Statewatch's: Observatory
Spotted an error? If you've spotted a problem with this page, just click once to let us know.
Statewatch does not have a corporate view, nor does it seek to create one, the views expressed are those of the author. Statewatch is not responsible for the content of external websites and inclusion of a link does not constitute an endorsement. Registered UK charity number: 1154784. Registered UK company number: 08480724. Registered company name: The Libertarian Research & Education Trust. Registered office: MayDay Rooms, 88 Fleet Street, London EC4Y 1DH. © Statewatch ISSN 1756-851X. Personal usage as private individuals "fair dealing" is allowed. We also welcome links to material on our site. Usage by those working for organisations is allowed only if the organisation holds an appropriate licence from the relevant reprographic rights organisation (eg: Copyright Licensing Agency in the UK) with such usage being subject to the terms and conditions of that licence and to local copyright law.