efamro making the case for research in European data protection review
On 15 July efamro and Esomar made a written submission to the European Commission on the review of the legal frame work for data protection. The submission follows a private stakeholders meeting on 1 July hosted by the Commission.
The discussions at the stakeholders meeting was based on a 60 question questionnaire, circulated in advance of the meeting. The Commission agreed to accept further written submissions in response to the questionnaire and discussions at the meeting.
In a joint response, efamro and Esomar addressed the issues of most concern to the research sector:
- Proposals to ban profiling should be targeted on those forms of the technique that produce legal effects concerning, or significantly affects, the data subject, not non-commercial activities such as market research. The Commission has not proposed a definition of profiling, but the current Council of Europe definition, which they may refer to, encompasses a wide range of activities, which may include research activities such as research segmentation for sampling purposes.
- The processing of personal data of persons under 18, while worthy of special protection, should not be subject to mandatory consent of a parent or responsible adult. The paper recommends a graduated approach recognising the long and complex transition from childhood to adulthood.
- Researchers should have continued access to publically available records in order to build samples. This is key to robust and representative research to support evidence based decisions and policy making.
- The current requirement for “unambiguous consent” of the data subject should not be changed to always require "explicit consent". Such a change would place would place disproportionate burdens on both the data subject and the data controller. By treating all consent in a formulaic way the value of consent overall is diminished and may in fact mean that data subjects are less protected.
- The interpretation of “statistical data” and “data for scientific purposes” is currently adequately supported by self regulatory codes and so does not require further clarification in the directive.
- Self-regulation should be encouraged as it provides a level of detail and granularity that is impossible to achieve in national or supra-national legislation and encourages sector specific authoritative guidance and regulation.
The full submission is available from the
Consultations page of the
efamro website.