Abstract
This chapter provides a meta-analysis of the preceding country-specific chapter, summarizing the ten-country European study which investigates whether citizens could effectively exercise their right of access to their personal data. This chapter synthesizes and analyses the summative results of this study and proposes an analytical framework to summarize the strategies, behaviours and discourses evidenced during the research and the ways in which organisations either facilitate or deny citizens’ attempts to access their data.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Bundesverfassungsgericht, decisions volume 65, p. 1 ff.
- 2.
All numerical data is rounded up to the nearest whole number (or half number in some instances).
- 3.
All researchers in this project had above average computer literacy.
- 4.
While a small number of non-CCTV sites were researched in person, this section focuses only on CCTV sites given the issues of legality/illegally as well as good and bad practices employed by data controllers.
- 5.
In Belgium for example, national legislation demands that data subjects provide a justifiable reason for requests to obtain CCTV footage.
- 6.
In the UK, Austria, Hungary, Norway, Spain and Belgium (and in some cases in Italy), CCTV operators must identify the data controller/operator of the system on the CCTV signage.
- 7.
See the methods chapter of this book for a description of how facilitative and restrictive practices were coded in the research.
- 8.
Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, OJ 1995 L 281/31.
- 9.
Emphasis added by author.
- 10.
See the above cross-European comparative analysis of legal and administrative framework of access rights.
- 11.
Several case examples are outlined in this section of the analysis. The individual country chapters present these cases in significantly more depth and provide a context-specific analysis of the access requests submitted in these cases.
- 12.
See the Italian country chapter in this collection for a further explanation of why the complaints were dismissed by the national DPA.
- 13.
See for example www.Europe-v-Facebook.org which has claimed that around only 29 % of data is disclosed when using Facebook’s download tool and is drawn from less than half of the categories of data held about users by Facebook.
- 14.
Article 12 of Loi réglant l’installation et l’utilisation de caméras de surveillance, 21 March 2007.
- 15.
- 16.
See for example the development of case law in the UK which has significantly narrowed the definitions of ‘personal data’ and ‘relevant filing system’.
- 17.
See the comparative analysis of legal and administrative frameworks in Europe above for further information.
References
Legislation and Case Law
Article 12 of Loi réglant l’installation et l’utilisation de caméras de surveillance, 21 March 2007
Article 28 of Loi du 2 août 2002 relative à la protection des personnes à l’égard du traitement des données à caractère personnel (2007), Mémorial Journal Officiel du Grand-Duché de Luxembourg, A – N°91: 1835–1854.
Bundesverfassungsgericht, decisions volume 65, p. 1 ff.
Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, OJ 1995 L 281/31.
Articles and Reports
Amberhawk (2012) ‘An Analysis of Google’s Privacy Policy and Related FAQs’, http://www.amberhawk.com/uploads/Google_privacy_docs.pdf (accessed 14 October 2014)
European Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) (2014) ‘Access to Data Protection Remedies in EU Member States’, http://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra-2014-access-data-protection-remedies_en.pdf (accessed 14 October 2014)
Hornung G. and Schnabel, C. (2009) ‘Data Protection in Germany I: The population census decision and the right to informational self-determination’, Computer Law & Security Report, 25(1): 84–88
Lyon, D. (2001) Surveillance society: monitoring everyday life. Buckinghamshire: Open University Press
Norris, P. (2003) Digital Divide: Civic engagement, information poverty and the Internet worldwide. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Norris, C., L’Hoiry, X. (2017). Exercising Citizen Rights Under Surveillance Regimes in Europe – Meta-analysis of a Ten Country Study. In: Norris, C., de Hert, P., L'Hoiry, X., Galetta, A. (eds) The Unaccountable State of Surveillance. Law, Governance and Technology Series(), vol 34. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47573-8_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47573-8_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-47571-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-47573-8
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)