[Chapter-delegates] Isoc , Eu Directive on data retention and Romanian Law request for comments

Tue Jun 28 13:19:39 PDT 2011

Thank you Costas,we are aware about the info you provided , but why cannot experts admit just for once that there is something wrong with this directive ? The isp's tell us it's wrong, the telcos providers tell us it's wrong, the associations of user protection the same.
Moreover , the constitutional Court remarks and EU directive are  in 180 degrees opposite directions , we don't see  a miracle solution in proposing another law, as the problem rised by the court comes from the directive. The transposition of aquis is pretty standard legal stuff , there is very little marge in the implementation. So what would be the solution ? If we put isoc name on the new law and the new law will not pass the pairlement , senate and Constitutional Court we will loss credibility. If we do nothing it would not help the EU netizens that we represent, as this problem was already largely discussed on the list.
Best regards,
Eduard

________________________________
 From: Costas Popotas <cpop at txt.gr>
To: Eduard Tric <eduard.tric at isoc.ro>; Marta Dias <marta at fccn.pt>; 'Chapter Delegates' <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2011 10:18 PM
Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] Isoc ,Eu Directive on data retention and Romanian Law request for comments

I intervene as an outsider but expert in EU law. 
When Romania joined EU it accepted the "acquis communautaire" the preexisting 
legal framework , thus the obligation to amend its legislation in domains 
contravening EU secondary legislation  according to the principle of 
supremacy of EU legislation. But as I understand it, the Romanian Court did not 
declare unconstitutional the EU directive (which they could have done since they 
have no such competence) they declared unconstitutional the national legislation 
implementing the directive. A directive is a broad framework stating the 
objectives to be attained leaving to the member state the responsibility of the 
means adopted. This means simply  new legislation has to be adopted in 
conformity with both EU directive and the national constitution. Nothing 
dramatic of revolutionary this has been done several times in the past 
elsewhere.

The end of a beautiful friendship has meaning 
only if a member state drops out of the EU.

best 

Costas Popotas 
Luxembourg 
----- Original Message ----- . 
>From: Eduard Tric 
>To: Marta Dias ; 'Chapter Delegates' 
>Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2011 3:36 
PM
>Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] Isoc ,Eu  Directive on data retention and Romanian Law request for comments
>
>
>Hi Marta , Thanks for the info, Portugal did their homework just  like any other member state. 
>
>What is interesting in Romania is that this law (and implicit the  directive ) is unconstitutional.
>The Directive 2006/24/EC was made  before EU enlargement, Romania never voted for it , so it should be modified. 
>
>As a general rule , any  directive declared unconstitutional by a member state should be  modified. 
>
>EU is a union of sovereign states and should never act as a  super-state, or it will be "the end of a beautiful friendship" , to mis-quote  from Casablanca..
>Regards,
>Eduard
>
>
>
>
>________________________________
> From: Marta Dias  <marta at fccn.pt>
>To: 'Eduard Tric' <eduard.tric at isoc.ro>; 'Chapter Delegates'  <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org>; 'Frederic Donck'  <donck at isoc.org>; 'Christopher Wilkinson'  <cw at christopherwilkinson.eu>
>Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2011 4:15  PM
>Subject: RE:  [Chapter-delegates] Isoc , Eu Directive on data retention and Romanian Law  request for comments
>
>
> 
>Hi,
>In Portugal Law 32/2008, transposes into national law Directive  2006/24/EC of Parliament and the Council of 15 March on the retention of data  generated or processed in the context of provision of electronic  communications services or of public communications networks. Under this law  the operators are required to retain the data for a one year period (from the  date of the conclusion of the communication).
>Best regards,
>Marta M. Dias
>ISOC.PT
> 
> 
>From:chapter-delegates-bounces at elists.isoc.org  [mailto:chapter-delegates-bounces at elists.isoc.org] On Behalf Of Eduard  Tric
>Sent: terça-feira, 28 de Junho de 2011 13:51
>To: Chapter Delegates; Frederic Donck; Christopher Wilkinson
>Subject: [Chapter-delegates] Isoc , Eu Directive on data retention and Romanian Law  request for comments
> 
>As you probably know , the  Romanian Constitutional Court has declared in 2009  Unconstitional the  Romanian  transposition of the Eu Directive on Data retention (romanian  law 298/2008). As a reminder , this directive asked to retain for 6 months  (expenses paid by the operators ) any telecommunication data, including and  not limited also to internet data.
> 
>Now the romanian government  decided to have a more open approach , and are asking for input from civil  society. We have 2-3 weeks to make an answer that is compliant to the  Directive AND to the Constitutional court decision.
> 
>We would be  happy to  take on our side input from other chapters, Isoc ECC,  Isoc HQ and  European Bureau.
> 
>. As it is unlikey that in  Romania other organisations will respond , we see this as an opportunity for  ISOC , especially in preparation for  the Inet in Bucharest but also to  mark a point and help to change this unuseful directive into a more  citzien-oriented one. It's gonna be our first public policy-making position,  so we want to be as accurate as possible.
> 
>Regards,
>Eduard Tric
> 
>References 
:
>http://www.mcsi.ro/Transparenta-decizionala
>http://www.mcsi.ro/Transparenta-decizionala/24/ProiectRetinereaDatelor
>http://www.mcsi.ro/Transparenta-decizionala/24/ExpunereMotive
>Eu Directive 2006/24/CE with  modification on 2002/58/CE   http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32006L0024:EN:HTML 
>romanian law 298/2008   http://www.legi-internet.ro/legislatie-itc/date-cu-caracter-personal/legea-2982008-privind-pastrarea-datelor-de-trafic-informational.html 
> 
>Eu commision letter from 16-th  of June 2011 reminding the necessity of transponding the directive  2006/24/CE 
> 
> 
> 
>
>
>________________________________
> _______________________________________________
>Chapter-delegates 
  mailing 
  list
>Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
>https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20110628/39aba693/attachment.htm>