European Council's objections to data protection rules may be harmful to businesses

ENGLAND, UK: The objections raised by the European Council's legal service to some provisions of the EC's proposed Data Protection regulation may not only be a cause of concern for the European Commission, but also for businesses handling data across the EU and the rest of the world. This is according to Luca Schiavoni, telecoms regulation analyst at Ovum.

He continues: "While the regulation had already been subject to significant criticism and lobbying, the provision that enacted Data Protection Authorities (DPAs) as a single "one-stop-shop" was one of the few aspects to be welcomed by internet companies.

"This would significantly reduce the burden of red tape and regulation that businesses face to comply with data protection rules, and would also play a key role in ensuring the consistency that the European Commission strives to achieve across its member states in regulating data protection.

"The objection is now likely to slow down the adoption of the regulation, after votes in a European Parliament committee in October had suggested that the key aspects of the rules would be approved without significant opposition. The halt appears even more surprising considering that the European Council had already dealt with the issue in October, and had reached the conclusion that such provisions were to be supported.

"If the new objections entailed a repeal of the one-stop-shop principle, businesses would have to deal with 28 different DPAs across the EU, which is likely to be exceedingly burdensome for small businesses and would hamper the consistency of the new regulatory framework.

"The proposed regulation sets out a detailed consistency mechanism, which involves the presence of a European Data Protection Board and the possibility that DPAs work together on specific cases. This should be sufficient to mitigate the concern that the one-stop-shop rule is only good for businesses and not for citizens. European lawmakers should look to strengthen such mechanism if necessary, rather than removing a key aspect of the new regulation with the risk to overburden businesses and end up with 28 different ways to apply the new regulation."