Targeted Retention of Communications Metadata: Future-proofing the Fight Against Serious Crime in Europe?

(Series Information) European Papers - A Journal on Law and Integration, 2023 8(2), 713-740 | Article | (Table of Contents) I. Introduction: data retention and future-proofing. – II. “The Lighthouse for Privacy Rights in Europe”? Past and present CJEU case law on communications data retention. – II....

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Gavin Robinson
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: European Papers (www.europeanpapers.eu) 2023-11-01
Series:European Papers
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.europeanpapers.eu/en/e.journal/targeted-retention-communications-metadata-future-proofing
_version_ 1797397718092480512
author Gavin Robinson
author_facet Gavin Robinson
author_sort Gavin Robinson
collection DOAJ
description (Series Information) European Papers - A Journal on Law and Integration, 2023 8(2), 713-740 | Article | (Table of Contents) I. Introduction: data retention and future-proofing. – II. “The Lighthouse for Privacy Rights in Europe”? Past and present CJEU case law on communications data retention. – II.1 Retain in haste, repent at leisure: the legacy of Directive 2006/24/EC. – II.2. La Quadrature du Net and Privacy International: from crime to national security (and back). – II.3. CJEU guidance on “targeted” retention for serious crime. III. Fu-ture-proof data retention. – III.1. How future-proof is the case law? ePrivacy reform and judicial fears of profiling. – III.2 First national “targeted” retention laws: the exception becomes the rule? – III.3. What we talk about when we talk about data retention: tomorrow’s metadata and future necessity. – IV. Conclusion. | (Abstract) In many countries worldwide, everyone’s communications metadata is pre-emptively retained by telecoms and internet service providers for possible later use by the relevant public authorities to combat crime and safeguard national security. Within the European Union, however, for nearly a decade the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has consistently rejected the pre-emptive “general and indiscriminate” retention of communications metadata for the purpose of combatting serious crime – although its position on safeguarding national security is more nuanced. For crime, the CJEU continues to insist that any retention of traffic and location data be done on a “targeted” basis, leaving the details of any such scheme to the relevant legislator (EU or national). This Article discusses the prospect of a return to EU-level data retention from a future-proofing perspective. It does so by summarising the most relevant recent CJEU case law, noting its internal consistency but arguing that its future resilience should not be taken for granted, particularly with the ePrivacy Regulation on the horizon. It offers a first analysis of efforts to implement “targeted” retention in national legal systems. Should any fresh EU legislative proposal on data retention emerge, it is argued that in addition to fully complying with the relevant CJEU standards, it will also be essential to gauge the desirability of such a reform in light of technological shifts in the information labelled “metadata”, and the intertwined condition that any such harmonising measure must be demonstrably effective over time.
first_indexed 2024-03-09T01:14:13Z
format Article
id doaj.art-f91f8d7816154101930d92c00db216cc
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2499-8249
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-09T01:14:13Z
publishDate 2023-11-01
publisher European Papers (www.europeanpapers.eu)
record_format Article
series European Papers
spelling doaj.art-f91f8d7816154101930d92c00db216cc2023-12-10T13:33:56ZengEuropean Papers (www.europeanpapers.eu)European Papers2499-82492023-11-012023 8271374010.15166/2499-8249/683Targeted Retention of Communications Metadata: Future-proofing the Fight Against Serious Crime in Europe?Gavin Robinson0Utrecht University(Series Information) European Papers - A Journal on Law and Integration, 2023 8(2), 713-740 | Article | (Table of Contents) I. Introduction: data retention and future-proofing. – II. “The Lighthouse for Privacy Rights in Europe”? Past and present CJEU case law on communications data retention. – II.1 Retain in haste, repent at leisure: the legacy of Directive 2006/24/EC. – II.2. La Quadrature du Net and Privacy International: from crime to national security (and back). – II.3. CJEU guidance on “targeted” retention for serious crime. III. Fu-ture-proof data retention. – III.1. How future-proof is the case law? ePrivacy reform and judicial fears of profiling. – III.2 First national “targeted” retention laws: the exception becomes the rule? – III.3. What we talk about when we talk about data retention: tomorrow’s metadata and future necessity. – IV. Conclusion. | (Abstract) In many countries worldwide, everyone’s communications metadata is pre-emptively retained by telecoms and internet service providers for possible later use by the relevant public authorities to combat crime and safeguard national security. Within the European Union, however, for nearly a decade the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has consistently rejected the pre-emptive “general and indiscriminate” retention of communications metadata for the purpose of combatting serious crime – although its position on safeguarding national security is more nuanced. For crime, the CJEU continues to insist that any retention of traffic and location data be done on a “targeted” basis, leaving the details of any such scheme to the relevant legislator (EU or national). This Article discusses the prospect of a return to EU-level data retention from a future-proofing perspective. It does so by summarising the most relevant recent CJEU case law, noting its internal consistency but arguing that its future resilience should not be taken for granted, particularly with the ePrivacy Regulation on the horizon. It offers a first analysis of efforts to implement “targeted” retention in national legal systems. Should any fresh EU legislative proposal on data retention emerge, it is argued that in addition to fully complying with the relevant CJEU standards, it will also be essential to gauge the desirability of such a reform in light of technological shifts in the information labelled “metadata”, and the intertwined condition that any such harmonising measure must be demonstrably effective over time.https://www.europeanpapers.eu/en/e.journal/targeted-retention-communications-metadata-future-proofingcommunications data retentionfuture-proofingcjeu case lawcrime preventiondata protectionprivacy
spellingShingle Gavin Robinson
Targeted Retention of Communications Metadata: Future-proofing the Fight Against Serious Crime in Europe?
European Papers
communications data retention
future-proofing
cjeu case law
crime prevention
data protection
privacy
title Targeted Retention of Communications Metadata: Future-proofing the Fight Against Serious Crime in Europe?
title_full Targeted Retention of Communications Metadata: Future-proofing the Fight Against Serious Crime in Europe?
title_fullStr Targeted Retention of Communications Metadata: Future-proofing the Fight Against Serious Crime in Europe?
title_full_unstemmed Targeted Retention of Communications Metadata: Future-proofing the Fight Against Serious Crime in Europe?
title_short Targeted Retention of Communications Metadata: Future-proofing the Fight Against Serious Crime in Europe?
title_sort targeted retention of communications metadata future proofing the fight against serious crime in europe
topic communications data retention
future-proofing
cjeu case law
crime prevention
data protection
privacy
url https://www.europeanpapers.eu/en/e.journal/targeted-retention-communications-metadata-future-proofing
work_keys_str_mv AT gavinrobinson targetedretentionofcommunicationsmetadatafutureproofingthefightagainstseriouscrimeineurope