The UK civil liberties group Privacy International, in co-operation with European Digital Rights, the Foundation for Information Policy Research and Statewatch, has published an analysis of the EU-US negotiations on the transfer on passenger information (PNR). The report titled 'Transferring Privacy' describes how the European Commission leaves European privacy rights at the mercy of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

According to the report the European Commission has 'not assured adequate protection requirements, clear purpose limitation, non-excessive data collection, limited data retention time, and insurance against further transfers beyond the Department of Homeland Security'. The report also points to the insufficiently independent privacy officers on the US side that will process complaints from EU passengers and a retention period of 3.5 years.

Privacy International is concerned that other countries under pressure from the U.S. to weaken their privacy regimes will have lost an ally in Europe, and will be forced to transfer data under similar, if not worse, conditions. "The result will be to a race to the bottom for global privacy protection."

In an included commentary the American Civil Liberties Union worries about the developments in Europe: "When it comes to privacy protections, we want to join Europe, not have them join us."

The report describes in detail how the Commission under the leadership of Bolkestein has agreed in secret that the US may use the PNR data in the Computer Assisted Passenger Pre-Screening System (CAPPS-II). This system will profile all passengers using various sources of information including private sector databases and intelligence information.

The report shows that the conflict over PNR transfer has supporters and opponents on both sides of the Atlantic: "we are not witnessing a battle between Europeans and Americans, but a battle between those in Europe and America who would like to construct an infrastructure for the global tracking and surveillance of individuals' movements, and those in Europe and America who believe that such a course is dangerous to freedom and an unpromising means of stopping terrorists."

The European Data Protection Authorities have published an opinion on the latest agreements between the EU and the US. The so-called Article 29 Data Protection Working Party calls the agreement inadequate. Any future and final agreement should at least limit the use of PNR to fighting acts of terrorism, the retention period should be shorter and passengers' data should not be used for implementing and/or testing CAPPS II or similar systems. The Working Party also calls for a 'truly independent redress mechanism' instead of the current Privacy Officer at the Department of Homeland Security.

Transferring Privacy: The Transfer of Passenger Records and the Abdication of Privacy Protection (02.2004)
http://www.privacyinternational.org/issues/terrorism/rpt/transferringp...

Article 29 Data Protection Working Party: Opinion 2/2004 (29.01.2004)
http://europa.eu.int/comm/internal_market/privacy/docs/wpdocs/2004/wp8...

Commission Staff Working Paper on PNR (21.01.2004)
http://www.statewatch.org/news/2004/feb/comm-capps-5589.en04.pdf

Draft undertakings of the Department of Homeland Security Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (12.01.2004)
http://www.statewatch.org/news/2004/jan/EUUSAG2.pdf

Documents and analysis: Statewatch observatory on the exchange of data on passengers (PNR) with USA
http://www.statewatch.org/pnrobservatory.htm

News and analysis on PNR and CAPPS-II from the US: Edward Hasbrouck's blog
http://hasbrouck.org/blog/archives/cat_privacy_and_travel.html