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.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS