IFJ: EU-datatjek går over gevind

IFJ og DJ vil forhindre tiltrædelse af et datadirektiv, som tillader udbredt indgreb i borgernes privatliv. Direktivet rammer i høj grad journalister.

IFJ/EFJ opfordrer sine medlemsorganisationer til at bombardere de respektive landes EU-parlamentarikere med nedenstående protest imod vedtagelse af Datadirektivet. Direktivets hensigt er at lette efterforskningen af kriminalitet, men EU-kommissionen går over gevind, når den foreslår, at mobilsamtaler, SMS og internetanvendelse kan spores geografisk og gemmes i 24 måneder. Det strider ifølge IFJ med artikel 8 (Retten til privatliv) i den Europæiske Menneskeretskonvention.

Hvis direktivet vedtages vil indskrænke arbejdsbetingelserne for undersøgende journalistik og kildebeskyttelse.

DJ har sendt nedenstående orientering og opfordring til de 13 danske medlemmer af EU-parlamentet.   

Dear Mr. XX, 

Review of the Data Retention Directive:

Its Harm on Press Freedom and Democracy in the EU 

We write to you on behalf of the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ), the regional group of the International Federation of Journalists representing more than 260.000 journalists across Europe, including all EU Member States.

We would like to draw your attention to the growing threat to press freedom caused by the EU Data Retention Directive (2006/24/EC), the so-called “big brother” legislation that allows telecommunications companies to store data of all of their customers' communications. The journalists’ community together with civil society groups has felt the increasing threat posed by the Directive on press freedom in Europe.

An assessment on the application of the Directive is currently undergoing by the European Commission under the services of Commissioner Cecilia Malmström, responsible for the EU Home Affairs. The Commission will submit by 15 September the assessment to the European Parliament and the European Council.

With this letter, we wish you could put forward the concerns of journalists and civil society groups on press freedom and ask the Commission to make the Directive optional for Member States during the review of the Directive.

The Directive creates a process for recording details of who communicated with whom via various electronic communications systems. In the case of mobile phone calls and SMS messages, the respective location of the users is also recorded. In combination with other data, Internet usage is also to be made traceable.

The EFJ and its affiliates in the Member States, together with other European and national civil society groups believe that such an invasive surveillance on the entire population is unacceptable and violated the fundamental right of privacy as laid down in Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. With a data retention regime in place, sensitive information about social and business contacts including those of journalists is collected in the absence of any suspicion.

Telecommunications data retention undermines the important principle of protection of sources for journalists which was repeatedly reaffirmed by the European Court of Human Rights as the cornerstone of press freedom. Such rights are constitutionally protected in some European countries. It therefore violates the freedom of the press and damages preconditions of our open and democratic societies in Europe.

We would wish to draw your attention on the Resolution on Developments in anti-terrorism legislation in Council of Europe Member States and their impact on freedom of expression and information adopted by the Ministers of States participating in the 1st Council of Europe Conference of Ministers responsible for Media and New Communication Services, held in Reykjavik on 28 and 29 May 2009. The Resolution is based on the understanding of the Ministers that existing Directive has become a growing threat to media freedom and the freedom of speech in Europe. The adoption of the Resolution aims to change such a trend.

The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe has adopted important standard-setting texts designed to assist Member States in this respect, including: Guidelines on human rights and the fight against terrorism (11 July 2002); Declaration on freedom of expression and information in the media in the context of the fight against terrorism (2 March 2005); Guidelines on protecting freedom of expression and information in times of crisis (26 September 2007).

Legal experts expect the European Court of Justice to follow the Constitutional Court of Romania as well as the European Court of Human Rights’ Marper judgement and declare the retention of telecommunications data in the absence of any suspicion incompatible with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.

As representatives of journalists together with civil society groups we reject the Directive on telecommunications data retention. We would highly appreciate it if you could address our concerns on press freedom with regard to the Directive to the Commission during the review processes.

Please find enclosed the following questions we wish you to put forwards to the Commission:

Questions which you could ask the Commission:

1. What will the Commission do to address a mass opposition to the Directive on legitimate concerns? Civil liberties, data protection and human rights associations, crisis line and emergency call operators, professional associations of journalists, jurists and doctors, trade unions, consumer organisations and industry associations all oppose the intrusive surveillance of the Directive.

2. The blanket collection of all telecommunications data deters informants from passing confidential information of public interest to journalists by telephone, fax or the Internet. Is the Commission considering making the Directive optional so that Member States can ensure the untraceability of contacts to the press?

3. The Constitutional Court of Romania decided in 2009 that blanket retention of all communications data violates fundamental rights (http://twiturl.de/DRromania). Is the Commission considering making the Directive optional so that Member States can comply with their constitutions?

Thank you very much for taking these proposals into account. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to call our European office (contact: renate.schroeder@ifj.org).