[pp.int.general] data retention in Dutch parliament

[Ricardo Cristof Remmert-Fontes]

Hey, Rainier!

Thank you for thisinformation.

Best regards,
Ricardo Cristof
- AK Vorrat - german working group on data retention -


Reinier Bakels schrieb:
> Yesterday the Dutch law implementing the data retention directive was 
> discussed in the Dutch parliament ("Tweede Kamer" = "lowerhouse").
> Government proposed 24 months, left wing opposition proposes six months 
> (= minimum), government coalition parties are divided: Christian 
> Democrats 24, socialists 6, Christian Union 12. Last mentioned party is 
> small, but its support for either 6 or 24 could be decisive. Its 
> spokesman was unwilling to decide yesterday "if and when".
>  
> Despite excellent contributions from several parliament members, the 
> government believes "more is better". The Max Planck Istitute study was 
> cited saying that a longer data retention period would have been useful 
> only in 0,01% of cases, but the Minister (a former law professor, 
> christian democrat) said that quantity is not the only decisive factor: 
> if one single high-profile case could be solved by a longer retention 
> period, that would count as well. (As an example, the disappearance of 
> Natalee Holoway on Aruba was mentioned, a case that made headlines in 
> the (Dutch) newspapers).
>  
> As you know, the Irish have submitted a case to the ECJ because they 
> believe the Data Retention Directive has no proper ground in the EU 
> treaties but the Dutch minister(/professor) said that this is irrelevant 
> for NL, at least it is not a reason to delay the implementation (which 
> is overdue anyway). Asked what if the Directive is implemented in Dutch 
> law, and subsequently declared invalid by the ECJ, he said "that could 
> theoretically happen to any Directive".
>  
> It struck me that various member states have chosen various periods (as 
> allowed by the directive, from 6-24 months) and also have different 
> compensation schemes. In NL, the upfront investment is to the provider, 
> while they get paid per request from the police, This would be a 
> disadvantage for smaller providers, that perhaps never get a request 
> from the police, while the larger providers could even make a profit 
> from such requests. Anyway, the typical purpose of Directives to create 
> a level playing field on the "common market" is not met here, on the 
> contrary. Incidentally, allegedly the marginal cost of retaining the 
> data 6 months more would be only 10%.
>  
> The minister said that the relevant data is collected anyway for billing 
> purposes - its only retained longer. I believe this is not true. Yes, I 
> pay per telephone call, but I pay a flat rate for ADSL Internet.
>  
> The parliament noted that major communication facilities such as 
> Hotmail, Gmail and Skype are not covered by the data retention 
> obligation. Left wing parties argued that the Directive therefore is 
> useless anyway, as criminals would switch to those services, and only 
> stupid criminals would be caught by "data retention". Right wing and 
> christian democrats asked the minister to consider future steps to 
> include such services also in "data retention" (which imho 
> is unrealistic as it requires the US to cooperate).
>  
> The vote will be later, but before 22/5, because then the law proposal 
> is sumitted to the Eerste Kamer, the Dutch "upper house". One of its 
> members is renowned former information law professor Franken, christian 
> democrat, who is very critical on the directive.
>  
> Background: some years ago, a majority in the parliament asked the 
> (previous) minister of Justice (Donner) _not_ to agree with the 
> Directive Proposal in the European Council, but he chose to ignore the 
> will of the parliament.
>  
> Unfortunately, no one on the parliament yesterday said that (perhaps?) 
> the only purpose Directive is to help record companies to fight MP3 file 
> sharers. Data retention would only be used to fight "severe crime", but 
> at the same time IPRED2 makes sure that copyright infringement is 
> designated as "severe crime".     
>  
> Groeten, Grüße, Regards, Cordialement, Hälsningar, Ciao, Saygilar, 
> Üdvözlettel, Pozdrowienia, Kumusta, Adios, Oan't sjen, Ave, Doei, 
> Yassou, Yoroshiku
>  >>> REINIER B. BAKELS PhD
> private: Johan Willem Frisostraat 149, 2713 CC Zoetermeer, The 
> Netherlands telephone: +31 79 316 3126, GSM ("Handy") +31 6 4988 6490,  
> fax +31 79 316 7221


Viele Grüße,
Ricardo Cristof

-- 
Arbeitskreis Vorratsdatenspeicherung
c/o Humanistische Union e.V.
Haus der Demokratie und Menschenrechte
Greifswalder Strasse 4
D-10405 Berlin

Fon: +49-30-94881297
Fax: +49-700-25808789
Mobile: +49-170-2487266
Jabber: rcrf at jabber.org
E-Mail: rcrf at vorratsdatenspeicherung.de
Web: http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de

My GnuPG-Key:
http://cristof.remmert-fontes.de/downloads/pgpkey_rcrf.zip
Key-ID: 25038B2F
Fingerprint: 5EA8 EF99 1B99 04DF 70C8 5F6E 85BC CA54 2503 8B2F