<html>
  <head>

    <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    <div id="container" class="container font-size5 content-width3">
      <div id="reader-header" class="header" style="display: block;"
        dir="ltr"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
          href="https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/ORG_policy_update/2017-w49">
https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/ORG_policy_update/2017-w49</a><br>
        <h1 id="reader-title">ORG policy update/2017-w49<br>
        </h1>
      </div>
      <hr>
      <div class="content">
        <div id="moz-reader-content" class="line-height4" dir="ltr"
          style="display: block;">
          <div id="readability-page-1" class="page">
            <div id="bodyContent" class="entry-content">
              <div id="mw-content-text" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"
                lang="en">
                <p>This is ORG's Policy Update for the week beginning
                  04/12/2017.
                </p>
                <p>If you are reading this online, you can also
                  subscribe to the <a rel="nofollow" class="external
                    text"
                    href="https://lists.openrightsgroup.org/listinfo/parliamentary.monitor">email
                    version or unsubscribe</a>.
                </p>
                <h2><span class="mw-headline" id="ORG.E2.80.99s_work">ORG’s
                    work</span></h2>
                <ul>
                  <li>ORG have begun to prepare briefings for peers in
                    the House of Lords for the upcoming Report Stage of
                    the Data Protection Bill (see below).</li>
                  <li>ORG is running a petition against the Government’s
                    proposals to criminalise repeated viewing of online
                    terrorist propaganda and compelling internet
                    companies to police their own networks. <a
                      rel="nofollow" class="external text"
href="https://action.openrightsgroup.org/censorship-and-control-are-not-answer-extremism">Sign
                      the petition here!</a></li>
                  <li>In case you couldn’t come to ORGCon, you can now
                    watch the talks online! <a rel="nofollow"
                      class="external text"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6VTrBpE_kA&list=PLY9gENnF8uiXdeFQtEA-Ge0pd7DtAsx4T">Have
                      a look at our YouTube channel</a>.</li>
                </ul>
                <p>Planned local group events:
                </p>
                <ul>
                  <li><a rel="nofollow" class="external text"
                      href="https://www.meetup.com/ORG-Birmingham/events/244943786/">ORG
                      Birmingham</a> are hosting an introduction to the
                    Indieweb on Monday 11 December. Tired of Twitter?
                    Fed up with Facebook? Miss the variety and
                    quirkiness of the open web? Be the change you want
                    to see in the world by visiting their introduction
                    to the Indieweb!</li>
                  <li><a rel="nofollow" class="external text"
                      href="https://www.meetup.com/ORG-London/events/243071922/">ORG
                      London</a> are hosting a presentation on the
                    'Cryptobar' installation on Tuesday 12 December.
                    Cryptobar is a project aimed at spreading the word
                    about privacy (and privacy-enhacing technologies) in
                    an artistic and accessible way.</li>
                </ul>
                <h2><span class="mw-headline" id="Official_meetings">Official
                    meetings</span></h2>
                <ul>
                  <li>Jim Killock gave a lecture on the "Nothing to
                    Hide, Nothing to Fear" argument to students at
                    Arcadia University.</li>
                  <li>Myles Jackman and Alex Haydock attended a Court of
                    Appeal hearing on Friday 8 December to hear progress
                    in the Davis/Watson case against DRIPA.</li>
                  <li>Jim Killock spoke at 89up's Assemble event about
                    the benefits that GDPR will give campaigners.</li>
                  <li>Myles Jackman and Alex Haydock met with David
                    Allen Green to discuss progress in the <a
                      href="https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Cartier"
                      title="Cartier" class="mw-redirect">Cartier</a>
                    case.</li>
                  <li>ORG Staff attended a preview screening of
                    forthcoming film <a rel="nofollow" class="external
                      text" href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt6294822/">The
                      Post</a>.</li>
                </ul>
                <h2><span class="mw-headline" id="UK_Parliament">UK
                    Parliament</span></h2>
                <h3><span class="mw-headline"
id="Joint_Committee_on_Human_Rights_publishes_note_about_Data_Protection_Bill">Joint
                    Committee on Human Rights publishes note about Data
                    Protection Bill</span></h3>
                <p>On 6 December, the Deputy Counsel to the Joint
                  Committee on Human Rights <a rel="nofollow"
                    class="external text"
href="https://www.parliament.uk/documents/joint-committees/human-rights/correspondence/2017-19/Note_Deputy_Counsel_DPBill.pdf">published
                    a note</a> about the human rights implications of
                  the Data Protection Bill. Crucially, among the key
                  considerations they highlight for the Committee to
                  consider are a number of issues of interest to ORG.
                </p>
                <p>Article 80(2) amendments were debated two weeks ago,
                  which would allow consumer groups like the Open Rights
                  Group to take independent action against entities who
                  have been abusing data protection law. In their note,
                  the Counsel addresses Article 80(2), noting that the
                  Committee:
                </p>
                <blockquote>may wish to consider whether the
                  Government's ommission of Article 80(2) may diminish
                  the protection of privacy rights and, if so, whether
                  civil society organisations ought to be empowered to
                  bring complains and seek effective remedies in the
                  public interest.</blockquote>
                <p>The Committee also considered the proposed exemption
                  to data protection which would remove all rights to
                  personal data when disclosure would prejudice
                  “effective immigration controls". Such an exemption
                  has never existed before. Requests for information
                  under data protection (subject access requests) are an
                  integral part of most immigration cases, and will be
                  critical for anyone going through an immigration
                  process in the future, such as the three million EU
                  citizens resident in the UK. The document notes that
                  the Committee:
                </p>
                <blockquote>may wish to consider whether an exemption
                  for effective immigration control is necessary and
                  proportionate given the broad reach this exemption
                  would have. The Committee may wish to make further
                  enquiries of the Government as to the justification
                  for this exemption.</blockquote>
                <p><b>Report sittings on the Data Protection Bill will
                    be held in the House of Lords on 11 December, 13
                    December, and 11 January.</b> The most recent
                  amendments submitted for the Bill's report stage can
                  be found <a rel="nofollow" class="external text"
href="https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/2017-2019/0074/18074-I.pdf">here</a>.
                  The Bill's third reading will be held on 17 January.
                </p>
                <h3><span class="mw-headline"
                    id="ICO_publishes_Lords.27_briefing_on_Data_Protection_Bill">ICO
                    publishes Lords' briefing on Data Protection Bill</span></h3>
                <p>In preparation for the upcoming Report stage of the
                  Data Protection Bill, the ICO have published a
                  briefing for the House of Lords raising many of the
                  same issues for consideration as the report published
                  by the Joint Committee on Human Rights.
                </p>
                <p>The briefing refers to the immigration exemption,
                  noting:
                </p>
                <blockquote>This exemption could potentially render
                  personal data unobtainable to the data subject and
                  this could be detrimental to individuals who are
                  appealing asylum decisions for example. If the
                  exemption is applied, individuals will not be able to
                  access their personal data to identify any factual
                  inaccuracies and it will mean that the system lacks
                  transparency and is fundamentally unfair.</blockquote>
                <p>The ICO also makes reference to Article 80(2), noting
                  that they support the amendment, which would give
                  civil interest groups like ORG the right to seek
                  redress on behalf of data subjects without needing to
                  be directly instructed by them:
                </p>
                <blockquote>As was highlighted in the Committee Stage
                  debate, there are circumstances where data subjects
                  may not necessarily be aware of what data about them
                  is held by organisations, and more importantly what is
                  being done with it. In such instances data subjects
                  could not be expected to know whether and how they
                  could exercise their rights under data protection law.
                  Furthermore, in the context of wider discussion of the
                  Bill and children’s rights, the relevance of this
                  point is of particular importance where young and
                  vulnerable data subjects are involved – these groups
                  being less likely to have the means and capability to
                  exercise their rights on their own behalf. The
                  Commissioner continues to support the derogation at
                  Article 80(2) being exercised to provide
                  representative bodies with this right of action.</blockquote>
                <h2><span class="mw-headline"
                    id="Other_national_developments">Other national
                    developments</span></h2>
                <h3><span class="mw-headline"
id="David_Anderson_QC_publishes_report_into_MI5.2FPolice_intelligence-handling_reviews">David
                    Anderson QC publishes report into MI5/Police
                    intelligence-handling reviews</span></h3>
                <p>This week, the Home Secretary published a report by
                  David Anderson QC into the internal reviews conducted
                  by the Police and by MI5, concerning their handling of
                  intelligence data prior to this year's terrorist
                  attacks at Westminster, Manchester Arena, London
                  Bridge and Finsbury Park.
                </p>
                <p>The full report and accompanying press release can be
                  accessed <a rel="nofollow" class="external text"
href="https://www.daqc.co.uk/2017/12/05/report-mi5-police-intelligence-handling-reviews/">here</a>.
                </p>
                <h3><span class="mw-headline"
                    id="Court_of_Appeal_Hearing_in_Davis.2FWatson_case_against_DRIPA">Court
                    of Appeal Hearing in Davis/Watson case against DRIPA</span></h3>
                <p>The Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014
                  (DRIPA) was the predecessor to the Investigatory
                  Powers Act 2016 and has been subject to a legal
                  challenge since June 2015, brought by MPs David Davis
                  and Tom Watson.
                </p>
                <p>The High Court held in 2015 that portions of the
                  DRIPA legislation were unlawful. The case then
                  progressed to the Court of Appeal, which began hearing
                  the Home Secretary's appeal in 2015.
                </p>
                <p>Since that time, the European Court of Justice
                  delivered a judgment (in Joined Cases C203/15 and
                  C698/15), which supported the High Court's position
                  that DRIPA was unlawful. The DRIPA legislation expired
                  at the end of December 2016.
                </p>
                <p>Despite the above, the Court of Appeal case
                  continues, as it revolves around points of law which
                  are relevant to the Investigatory Powers Act, into
                  Part 4 of which were incorporated many of the
                  provisions of DRIPA, including some which were under
                  dispute.
                </p>
                <p>On Friday 8, a Court of Appeal took place to hear
                  some final arguments in the Davis/Watson case. The
                  court is expected to deliver a judgment soon and may
                  choose to affirm the position of the CJEU, which would
                  be a victory for ORG.
                </p>
                <h2><span class="mw-headline" id="Europe">Europe</span></h2>
                <h3><span class="mw-headline"
id="EU_regulators_threaten_court_challenge_to_EU-U.S._data_transfer_pact">EU
                    regulators threaten court challenge to EU-U.S. data
                    transfer pact</span></h3>
                <p><a
href="https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Article_29_Data_Protection_Working_Party"
                    title="Article 29 Data Protection Working Party">Article
                    29 Data Protection Working Party</a> adopted an <a
                    rel="nofollow" class="external text"
href="https://www.huntonprivacyblog.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/18/2017/12/WP-29-Privacy-Shield-Opinion.pdf">opinion
                    on the review of Privacy Shield</a> agreement this
                  week. Privacy Shield framework enables cross-border
                  data transfers between EU and the US in compliance
                  with EU data protection rules. </p>
                <p>Article 29 is an advisory body made up of each Member
                  State’s data protection authority representative. They
                  were tasked with a review of the Privacy Shield
                  framework after one year of being in place since it
                  replaced the Safe Harbour agreement. </p>
                <p>In their opinion, the <a rel="nofollow"
                    class="external text"
href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-dataprotection-usa/eu-regulators-threaten-court-challenge-to-eu-u-s-data-transfer-pact-idUSKBN1E01DP">Working
                    Party 29 has identified a number of significant
                    concerns</a> that need to be addressed by both the
                  European Commission and the US authorities. These
                  include the appointment of an independent Ombudsperson
                  and members of Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight
                  Board in the US. They note that the appointments need
                  to be in place by 25 May 2018 (date when the General
                  Data Protection Regulation comes into force). </p>
                <p>Further concerns raised by the WP29 include:
                </p>
                <ul>
                  <li>Lack of guidance for the companies adhering to the
                    Privacy Shield</li>
                  <li>Lack of clear and easily available information for
                    EU individuals </li>
                  <li>Lack of oversight and supervision of compliance
                    with the Principles</li>
                  <li>Application of the Privacy Shield to data
                    processors established in the US</li>
                  <li>Lack of legal guarantees for automated
                    profiling/decision making</li>
                  <li>Self-Certification process and cooperation between
                    US authorities in the Privacy Shield mechanism</li>
                </ul>
                <p>The data protection authorities expect these concerns
                  to be resolved by Autumn 2018. If the EU and the US
                  fail to do so, Article 29: </p>
                <blockquote>”will take appropriate action, including
                  bringing the Privacy Shield Adequacy decision to
                  national courts for them to make a reference to the
                  CJEU for a preliminary ruling.”</blockquote>
                <h2><span class="mw-headline" id="ORG_media_coverage">ORG
                    media coverage</span></h2>
                <p><i>See <a
                      href="https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/ORG_Press_Coverage"
                      title="ORG Press Coverage">ORG Press Coverage</a>
                    for full details.</i>
                </p>
                <dl>
                  <dt>2017-12-04-Business Insider-<a rel="nofollow"
                      class="external text"
href="http://uk.businessinsider.com/ico-making-enquiries-mps-parliament-sharing-email-passwords-staff-2017-12">The
                      UK's privacy watchdog is 'making enquiries' after
                      MPs said they hand out passwords to staff</a></dt>
                  <dd>Author: Shona Ghosh</dd>
                  <dd>Summary: Jim Killock quoted in a story about
                    possible data protection breaches by MPs sharing
                    Parliamaentary logins.</dd>
                  <dd>Topics: <a
                      href="https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Data_protection"
                      title="Data protection">Data protection</a>, <a
                      href="https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Privacy"
                      title="Privacy">Privacy</a></dd>
                  <dt>2017-12-04-BBC News-<a rel="nofollow"
                      class="external text"
                      href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42216622">MP
                      Nadine Dorries defends 'shared password' tweet</a></dt>
                  <dd>Author: BBC News</dd>
                  <dd>Summary: Jim Killock quoted in a story about
                    possible data protection breaches by MPs sharing
                    Parliamaentary logins.</dd>
                  <dd>Topics: <a
                      href="https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Data_protection"
                      title="Data protection">Data protection</a>, <a
                      href="https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Privacy"
                      title="Privacy">Privacy</a></dd>
                  <dt>2017-12-05-The National-<a rel="nofollow"
                      class="external text"
href="http://www.thenational.scot/news/15701477.Data_privacy_regulator_warns_MPs_over_sharing_computer_logins/">Data
                      privacy regulator warns MPs over sharing computer
                      logins</a></dt>
                  <dd>Author: Gregor Young</dd>
                  <dd>Summary: Jim Killock quoted in a story about
                    possible data protection breaches by MPs sharing
                    Parliamentary logins.</dd>
                  <dd>Topics: <a
                      href="https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Data_protection"
                      title="Data protection">Data protection</a>, <a
                      href="https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Privacy"
                      title="Privacy">Privacy</a></dd>
                  <dt>2017-12-07-Gizmodo-<a rel="nofollow"
                      class="external text"
href="http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2017/12/campaigners-are-asking-the-government-not-to-strip-eu-citizens-of-their-digital-rights/">Campaigners
                      Are Asking the Government Not to Strip EU Citizens
                      of Their Digital Rights</a></dt>
                  <dd>Author: Tom Pritchard</dd>
                  <dd>Summary: Jim Killock quoted in a story about the
                    proposed immigration exemption to the forthcoming
                    Data Protection Bill.</dd>
                  <dd>Topics: <a
                      href="https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Data_protection"
                      title="Data protection">Data protection</a>, <a
                      href="https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Privacy"
                      title="Privacy">Privacy</a></dd>
                </dl>
                <h2><span class="mw-headline" id="ORG_Contact_Details">ORG
                    Contact Details</span></h2>
                <p><a rel="nofollow" class="external text"
                    href="https://www.openrightsgroup.org/people/staff">Staff
                    page</a>
                </p>
                <ul>
                  <li> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text"
                      href="https://www.openrightsgroup.org/people/staff#jim">Jim
                      Killock, Executive Director</a></li>
                  <li> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text"
                      href="https://www.openrightsgroup.org/people/staff#javier">Javier
                      Ruiz, Policy Director</a></li>
                  <li> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text"
                      href="https://www.openrightsgroup.org/people/staff#ed">Ed
                      Johnson-Williams, Campaigns</a></li>
                  <li> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text"
                      href="https://www.openrightsgroup.org/people/staff#lee">Lee
                      Maguire, Tech</a></li>
                  <li> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text"
                      href="https://www.openrightsgroup.org/people/staff#myles">Myles
                      Jackman, Legal Director</a></li>
                  <li> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text"
                      href="https://www.openrightsgroup.org/people/staff#alex">Alex
                      Haydock, Legal Intern</a></li>
                  <li> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text"
                      href="https://www.openrightsgroup.org/people/staff#matthew">Matthew
                      Rice, Scotland Director</a></li>
                  <li> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text"
                      href="https://www.openrightsgroup.org/people/staff#slavka">Slavka
                      Bielikova, Policy Officer</a></li>
                  <li> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text"
                      href="https://www.openrightsgroup.org/people/staff#mike">Mike
                      Morel, Campaigner</a></li>
                  <li> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text"
                      href="https://www.openrightsgroup.org/people/staff#caitlin">Caitlin
                      Bishop, Campaigns Communication Officer</a></li>
                </ul>
              </div>
            </div>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
      <div> </div>
    </div>
  </body>
</html>