For the half-year to 31 December 2014, the IPKat's regular team is supplemented by contributions from guest bloggers Rebecca Gulbul, Lucas Michels and Marie-Andrée Weiss.

Regular round-ups of the previous week's blogposts are kindly compiled by Alberto Bellan.

Wednesday, 28 May 2008

Jersey now safe for EU data

Breaking news today is that the Commission Decision of 8 May 2008 pursuant to Directive 95/46 on the adequate protection of personal data in Jersey has now been posted on the European Union's Official Journal website.

Right: Seymour Tower, Jersey, looks a safe enough place for storing personal data

What does this mean? Let the IPKat explain:

1. Under Directive 95/46 itself ["on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data"], Member States are required to provide that the transfer of personal data to any third country may take place only if that country in question ensures an adequate level of protection and if the Member States' laws implementing other provisions of the Directive are complied with before that transfer takes place.

2. The Bailiwick of Jersey a dependency of the British Crown (being neither part of the UK nor a colony) and it enjoys full independence for most purposes (but not international relations or defence). Jersey is thus a "third country" within the meaning of the Directive.

3. The UK's ratification of the European Convention on Human Rights and the Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Individuals with regard to automatic processing of personal data were extended to the Bailiwick of Jersey, which has implemented these standards in the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 1987, the Data Protection (Amendment) (Jersey) Law 2005, and the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2005 (Appointed Day) Act 2005, together with the requisite secondary implementing legislation.

4. The legal standards applicable in Jersey cover all the basic principles necessary for an adequate level of protection for natural persons, guaranteed by judicial remedy and by independent supervision carried out by the Data Protection Commissioner. Accordingly Jersey can safely be regarded as providing an adequate level of protection for personal data under Directive 95/46.
The IPKat is delighted with this. He hazards a guess that a good deal of personal data has already been unwittingly exported to Jersey in the mistaken belief that it is part of the United Kingdom. Merpel says, but you haven't told readers that, under Article 3 of the Decision, the transfer of data can be suspended if it seems that the authorities in Jersey aren't taking proper care of that data: that should keep the authorities there on their toes.

Recipe with Jersey cream here
Jersey cows here

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

But no sign of approval for the Faroe Islands following the earlier positive views from the Art. 29 WP?
Clearly this is a major problem for Faroe Island's plans to become a major sheep powered data hub.
TNS

Subscribe to the IPKat's posts by email here

Just pop your email address into the box and click 'Subscribe':