October

On July 19, 2016, Advocate General Saugmandsgaard Oe, published his Opinion on two joined cases relating to data retention requirements in the EU, C-203|15 and C-698|15. These cases were brought following the Court of Justice for the European Union 's (CJEU 's) decision in the Digital Rights Ireland case, which invalidated Directive 2006|24|EC on data retention. The two cases, referred from courts in Sweden and the UK respectively, sought to establish whether a general obligation to retain data is compatible with the fundamental rights to privacy and data protection under EU law. In his Opinion, the Advocate General stresses the need to find a balance between a nation 's need to effectively fight serious crime, such as terrorism, against individuals ' fundamental rights. The Advocate General found that a general obligation to retain data may be compatible with EU law, although any action from an EU Member State against the possibility of imposing such an obligation is subject to strict requirements. The national courts are responsible for determining whether or not such requirements are satisfied.

"Civil Liberties Committee Ministers of European Parliament (MEP) called for the addition of non-European Union (EU) nationals to the European Criminal Records Information System (ECRIS) that EU countries use to exchange information on the criminal convictions of EU citizens.

The committee supported the proposal by a vote of 45-2, with four abstentions. The new directive is a key measure under the European Agenda on Security and an important tool for fighting cross-border crime and terrorism. ""We need to restore public confidence that we are able to monitor who comes into the EU, and to find people who could represent a threat,"" Timothy Kirkhope, minister of parliament in the EU, said. ""Checking people against our existing criminal records databases, and making exchanging that information much easier, will go a long way towards showing that we can find those people who mean us harm, amongst the vast majority who do not."""

On June 30, 2016, a joint committee composed of representatives from both chambers of the French Parliament (Joint Committee) reached a common position on the French 'Digital Republic ' Bill that rejects the data localization amendment previously approved by the French Senate, but significantly amends other aspects of the French Data Protection Act. One of the issues discussed by the Joint Committee was the amendment (corrigendum No. 473) adopted by the French Senate on April 27, 2016. This amendment added a data localization provision to the French Data Protection Act, requiring that personal data be stored in a data center located in the EU and not transferred outside of the EU. The French Government was against this amendment which ignored current and future cross-border data transfer restrictions. Unsurprisingly, the amendment was deleted by the Joint Committee. The French Digital Republic Bill now needs to be formally adopted by both chambers of the French Parliament.