MEPs: US law violates privacy of EU citizens

Members of the European Parliament have criticised the Council of Ministers and the European Commission for failing to protect EU citizens against a US law which would allow the American authorities to intercept their telephone calls and emails.

The Council has said that the new law, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, is a sovereign issue for America and has not been raised in meetings with US officials.

The Council’s comment is part of a reply to questions put by two Liberal MEPs shortly after the law was signed by US President George W. Bush on 5 August. Dutch MEP Sophie in ’t Veld and British MEP Graham Watson queried the prospect of US intelligence services intercepting electronic communication which is routed through America by non-US citizens outside its borders. The law allows the US government to intercept the calls and emails without court warrants.

The MEPs asked how European telecommunications could be protected and if information intercepted by the US authorities could be used to extradite a European citizen.

In a draft reply the Council secretariat said: "US Congress adopted legislation applicable to its own sovereign area."

The data being intercepted by the US intelligence services under the new law did not come under the agreements the EU has with the US on the exchange of airline passenger information or the transfer of banking transactions, according to the reply.

In ’t Veld criticised the Council for accepting a violation of European data protection laws. "Even if it is all legal how can the Commission and the Council be so passive and indifferent to protecting citizens’ privacy?" she asked.

But Stephan Beckert, director of research at Telegeography, a Washington-based firm which does market research into cross-border telecommunications, said that little internet traffic within Europe was routed through the US. This is because major internet carriers are situated in Amsterdam, Frankfurt, London and Paris. "It is pretty unlikely that much of the intra-European traffic would go via the US," Beckert added.

But some telephone calls within Europe could go through the US given that calls are routed through the cheapest carriers, he said. In addition, the vast majority of the Europe-Latin America internet activity goes through the US and more than half the internet activity from Europe to Asia goes through the US, Beckert added.

In ’t Veld said that the EU’s failure to act on the new US law was similar to the way the new agreement on airline passenger data was reached last June. "We always criticise the Americans but it is the Council and Commission that has failed to protect European interests," said in ’t Veld. An opinion on the new deal on airline passenger information by the member states’ protection commissioners states that "the safeguards provided for under the previous agreement have been markedly weakened".

The amount of data on passengers which can be transferred to the US has been increased, not decreased, as the Commission has claimed, the data commissioners said. The US authorities can now access sensitive data such as race, ethnicity, political or religious beliefs. The data commissioners also criticised the increased length of time permitted for storing the data and the fact that "the mechanism for joint review does not mention the involvement of independent data protection authorities".

Members of the European Parliament have criticised the Council of Ministers and the European Commission for failing to protect EU citizens against a US law which would allow the American authorities to intercept their telephone calls and emails.