Informal JHA Ministerial Meeting in Dublin, 17-18 January 2013:
Flash Report

	Data protection

	The Presidency invited Ministers to discuss three key issues on
data protection: the household-exemption (a), the right to be forgotten
(b) and the proposed administrative sanctions (c).

	Regarding (a) Vice-President Reding explained that the current
Data protection Directive does not apply to individuals processing data
of a purely personal activity whilst the proposed Regulation would
foresee a more differentiated regime (exclusion of individuals acting in
a private capacity without gainful interest, light rules if a gainful
interest was pursued, full application of the Regulation if data was
processed for a professional or commercial activity). Most Member States
felt that the criterion of gainful interest was not clear enough.  BG,
NL, PL, DK advocated to replace gainful interest with professional
activity, ES and MT wished to retain the status quo, HU and EE were in
favour of a more risk based approach. UK and HU wondered whether
blogging would be included.

	Concerning (b) the Commission stressed that the right to be
forgotten ensured that individuals remained in control of their data;
the proposed rule was pragmatic and foresaw an obligation to act ("take
all reasonable steps") but not of result. Member States supported a
right to be forgotten but saw the need to further discuss its practical
implementation, clarify its scope and avoid disproportionate burden. ES
suggested limiting it to online and other necessary areas, UK felt the
proposed provision would negatively affect smaller businesses.

	As regards (c) the Commission highlighted that sanctions had to
be appropriate, proportionate and dissuasive as they would otherwise not
be a deterrent. Member States stressed that it was for the national
authorities to apply the sanctions in view of the specific case at
stake. A number of Member States (ES, BG, UK, PT, FI, MT, EL, CY) wished
to foresee wider provision for warnings or reprimands or to take
mitigating factors such as adherence to an approved code of conduct into
account. UK, FI, EL, DK and PT considered the maximum amount (2% of
annual worldwide turnover) as too high.

	The representative of the JURI committee suggested to retain the
status quo on the household exemption and highlighted the importance of
the right to be forgotten and that national authorities needed some
margin on sanctions. The Commission thanked for the constructive remarks
of which it had taken good note.