The Facebook-Cambridge Analytica scandal has made us realize how important strong data protection rules are for society as a whole, including for the very functioning of the democratic process.
These and other developments have shown that the protection of privacy, as a central individual right and a democratic imperative, but also as an economic necessity, is crucial: Without consumers’ trust in the way that their data are handled, our data-driven economies will not thrive.
The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), entering into application on May 25, is the EU’s response to these challenges and opportunities. It seeks to create a virtuous circle between better protection of privacy as a fundamental right, enhanced confidence of consumers in how the privacy and security of their data are guaranteed, in particular in the online world, and economic growth.
While building on foundations that have been in place for more than 20 years under a 1995 directive, the GDPR contains important innovations. Many of these changes are particularly relevant to Taiwanese and other foreign companies doing business in Europe.
Such companies will now offer their goods and services in a harmonized and simplified regulatory environment. Instead of having to deal with 28 different data protection laws and 28 different regulators, one set of rules will apply and will be interpreted in a uniform way throughout the continent.
Obligations to notify data processing operations or obtain prior authorization from data protection authorities will be scrapped. A number of key concepts are clarified and adapted to the needs of the digital economy. International data transfers from the EU will be simplified and facilitated. All this will mean increased legal certainty, and a significant reduction in compliance costs and red tape.
The GDPR is also based on a modern approach to regulation that rewards new ideas, methods and technologies to address privacy and data security. The principles of data protection “by design” and “by default” will create incentives to develop innovative solutions from the earliest stages of development.
The so-called “risk-based approach” means that companies that limit the level of risk of their processing operations will not be subject to a number of obligations. Coregulatory tools, such as codes of conduct and certification mechanisms, are introduced to help companies managing and demonstrating compliance.
Last but not least, new rights and safeguards, such as the right to portability or the notification of data breaches, will put individuals in better control of their data.
Empowering consumers also means ensuring that they feel safer and more confident when sharing their data. These are just a few examples of how the effective protection of a fundamental right can go hand in hand with unleashing the full potential of the digital economy.
These developments are of course not limited to Europe. Today, more than 120 countries, from almost all around the globe, have data privacy law in place. Taiwan has also adopted a data privacy law.
Many of the new, or modernized, laws tend to be based on common elements: comprehensive legislation (rather than sectorial rules), a set of enforceable rights and setting up an independent supervisory authority, among others.
While improving the level of protection of personal data when transferred abroad, this developing convergence offers new opportunities to facilitate trade, as well as cooperation between public authorities, both of which increasingly rely on the exchange of personal data.
The European Commission is committed to intensifying its dialogue with its international partners, like Taiwan, in this area, to promote and further develop elements of convergence between privacy regimes. This includes the possibility of adopting adequacy findings allowing unhindered data flows, as is being discussed with Japan and South Korea.
We are of course also open to discussions with other partners on this issue. It involves contributing to the elaboration of much-needed international standards, such as in the framework of the Council of Europe’s Convention 108, which has an increasingly universal membership.
Fostering convergence also means learning from each other through the exchange of experience and best practices. This type of dialogue is essential in our interconnected world if we want to address challenges that are increasingly global in nature and scope.
Vera Jourova is European Commissioner for Justice, Consumers and Gender Equality.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath