The Post-Brexit Need for a Data Adequacy Decision to Engage in Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters with the EU

Matthew Bruce
{"title":"The Post-Brexit Need for a Data Adequacy Decision to Engage in Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters with the EU","authors":"Matthew Bruce","doi":"10.15664/stalj.v3i1.2646","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There is a need for the UK and EU to continue mutual assistance in criminal matters. As a Member State, Mutual assistance in criminal matters between was primarily governed by an EU convention. This convention builds on existing Council of Europe (CoE) conventions on mutual criminal assistance. The EU convention states that mutual assistance shall be afforded in proceedings brought by member states’ authorities, or in connection with proceedings where a person may be liable in the requesting member state. Title II provides a framework for specific forms of assistance including restitution, hearings via videoconference and covert investigations. Member states are free to conclude further bilateral arrangements. A key element of this mutual assistance is harmonised EU data protection laws. With the UK now outside the EU’s data protection architecture, this may pose a significant hurdle for future cooperation. This article critically analyses the need for a data adequacy decision from the EU for the UK to engage in mutual assistance in criminal matters post-Brexit. To reach a conclusion, the article is set out over three substantive areas considering: mutual assistance and data protection law as it applies to EU member states; the law underpinning adequacy decisions; and future legal developments post-Brexit. Specific examples of data transfers and the effect of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) are compared and contrasted to adequacy decisions. While provisions of the TCA and EU Law Enforcement Directive (LED) provide some assurances, the article recommends that a data adequacy decision made under the LED is pursued.","PeriodicalId":292385,"journal":{"name":"St Andrews Law Journal","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"St Andrews Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15664/stalj.v3i1.2646","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There is a need for the UK and EU to continue mutual assistance in criminal matters. As a Member State, Mutual assistance in criminal matters between was primarily governed by an EU convention. This convention builds on existing Council of Europe (CoE) conventions on mutual criminal assistance. The EU convention states that mutual assistance shall be afforded in proceedings brought by member states’ authorities, or in connection with proceedings where a person may be liable in the requesting member state. Title II provides a framework for specific forms of assistance including restitution, hearings via videoconference and covert investigations. Member states are free to conclude further bilateral arrangements. A key element of this mutual assistance is harmonised EU data protection laws. With the UK now outside the EU’s data protection architecture, this may pose a significant hurdle for future cooperation. This article critically analyses the need for a data adequacy decision from the EU for the UK to engage in mutual assistance in criminal matters post-Brexit. To reach a conclusion, the article is set out over three substantive areas considering: mutual assistance and data protection law as it applies to EU member states; the law underpinning adequacy decisions; and future legal developments post-Brexit. Specific examples of data transfers and the effect of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) are compared and contrasted to adequacy decisions. While provisions of the TCA and EU Law Enforcement Directive (LED) provide some assurances, the article recommends that a data adequacy decision made under the LED is pursued.
英国脱欧后需要数据充分性决定,以便与欧盟在刑事事务中相互协助
英国和欧盟有必要在刑事事务上继续相互协助。作为一个成员国,在刑事事项上的相互协助主要是由欧盟公约规定的。该公约以欧洲委员会现有的刑事互助公约为基础。《欧盟公约》规定,在成员国当局提起的诉讼中,或在与请求成员国可能负有法律责任的人有关的诉讼中,应提供互助。第二章规定了具体援助形式的框架,包括赔偿、通过视频会议进行的听证会和秘密调查。各成员国可自由缔结进一步的双边安排。这种互助的一个关键要素是协调一致的欧盟数据保护法。由于英国现在不在欧盟的数据保护体系中,这可能会对未来的合作构成重大障碍。本文批判性地分析了欧盟对英国在脱欧后刑事事务中相互协助的数据充足性决定的必要性。为了得出结论,本文将考虑三个实质性领域:互助和数据保护法,因为它适用于欧盟成员国;支持充分性决定的法律;以及英国脱欧后的未来法律发展。数据转移的具体例子和贸易与合作协定(TCA)的影响与充分性决策进行了比较和对比。虽然TCA和欧盟执法指令(LED)的规定提供了一些保证,但本文建议根据LED做出数据充分性决定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信