Dear Bureau
Ladies and Gentlemen,
since 11 September 2001, a number of measures have been taken in the fight against terrorism. Many measures meant A marked limitation of civil rights. The collection and exchange of Fluggastda-ten (PNR) is one of them. In the fight against terrorism is crucial for the FDP, however, that the fight against terrorism as effectively as possible, while necessarily connected with the least interference with civil rights is.
The collection and transfer of passenger data affects a large number of people qualified and their personal data. There is a substantial interference with the right to informational self-determination. We have therefore a long time and depth with PNR. We in the FDP always very critical comments on the topic, this (see, for Example, our application 16/8115 from the last WP), especially concerning the USA Agreement, as the data protection standards and the legal guarantees of this Agreement are not acceptable. For this reason, we have also agreed in the coalition agreement that may be the U.S. agreement not a guide to other possible agreements. As in the coalition agreement agreed, we commit ourselves to a higher level of data protection in EU negotiations.
The left calls for in its request for an immediate waiver of PNR as a whole. But at last we see more positive movements in the EU. The Commission Communication on the corners for the future development of PNR agreements with third States meets in the Great Overall, our requirements and provides an essential marked improvement to the current agreement dar. Liberal efforts at EU level have been worthwhile.
We are pleased that the Commission's commitment to international standards of PNR agreements that have a high level of data protection. The Commission wants to make privacy and data security safeguards in the recipient countries to pre-condition for the conclusion of PNR agreement and the re-transmission on to more places in the country or outside limit. In addition to training of origin and legal safeguards enshrined parties and transparency regarding the collection and the possible use should be improved. This we the FDP has always required.
We also welcome that the Commission would likely revise the agreement with the U.S., Australia and Canada. I want to emphasize again that the USA agreement is particularly reprehensible in data protection terms. Based on the Commission communication future agreements could vary considerably, but he better. The repeal of agreements concluded, as the left-hand in their application is required, currently not in question. Also, it is not currently appropriate as a non-disclosure of data would mean losing the planes to their landing rights in that country would, or else the data would then be passed without any certainty be.
The Commission took up the remainder other FDP demands: the purpose to fight terrorism and serious crime under internationally accepted definitions, by restricting the transfer of data to a minimum, the general improvement of data security and the establish-tion of independent data protection supervisory .
Although we therefore see an improvement, there are criticisms, of course - is at the game, the use and storage of sensitive data is allowed? I would like to emphasize that the basis for PNR still missing: we need to review the necessity and proportionality. We join here in the European Parliament and the German Federal Data Protection Officer, who has already called about a year ago the Commission to review the PNR agreement in terms of proportionality. It has to also consider whether or not the API data could be considered sufficient to achieve the desired purpose. This study we want to wait. This is crucial for us. Also new negotiating mandates with the U.S., Australia and Canada must be tested for proportionality, before they are adopted by the Council.
We will work with our liberal colleagues in Brussels for more ef-fective and use proportionate security measures.
- Jimmy Schulz 
