Access to Personal Data and the Right to Good Governance during Asylum Procedures after the cjeu’s YS. and M. and S. judgment (C-141/12 and C-372/12)

in European Journal of Migration and Law
No Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?



Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.



Help

Have Institutional Access?



Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



Connect

In the YS. and M. and S. judgment, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled on three procedures in which Dutch judges asked for clarification on the right of asylum seekers to have access to the documents regarding the decision on asylum applications. The judgment is relevant for interpreting the concept of personal data and the scope of the right of access under the Data Protection Directive, and the right to good administration in the eu Charter of Fundamental Rights. At first glance, the judgment seems disappointing from the viewpoint of individual rights. Nevertheless, in our view the judgment provides sufficient grounds for effective access rights to the minutes in future asylum cases.

Access to Personal Data and the Right to Good Governance during Asylum Procedures after the cjeu’s YS. and M. and S. judgment (C-141/12 and C-372/12)

in European Journal of Migration and Law

Sections

References

  • 11

    See for instance G.J. Zwenne (2013) De verwaterde privacywet [Diluted Privacy Law] Inaugural lecture of Prof. Dr. G. J. Zwenne to the office of Professor of Law and the Information Society at the University of Leiden on Friday 12 April 2013 Leiden: Universiteit Leiden; F.J. Zuiderveen Borgesius (2014) Improving Privacy Protection in the area of Behavioural Targeting PhD thesis University of Amsterdam Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam chapter 5.

  • 26

    See amongst others: E. Brouwer (2008) Digital Borders and Real Rights: Effective Remedies for Third-Country Nationals in the Schengen Information System diss. Nijmegen 2007 Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff p. 200. See also A.F. Westin (1967) Privacy and Freedom New York ny: Atheneum p. 158; P. de Hert and S. Gutwirth (2006) ‘Privacy data protection and law enforcement. Opacity of the individual and transparency of power’ in: E. Claes A. Duff and S. Gutwirth (eds) Privacy and the criminal law Antwerp: Intersentia pp. 61–104.

  • 30

    See S. Gutwirth and Y. Poullet (2008) ‘The contribution of the Article 29 Working Party to the construction of a harmonised European data protection system: an illustration of “reflexive governance”?’ in: V.P. Asinari and P. Palazzi (eds) Défis du Droit à la Protection de la Vie Privée. Challenges of Privacy and Data Protection Law Brussels: Bruylant pp. 569–609.

  • 32

    See also Jansensupra note 27; D. Korff ‘The proposed General Data Protection Regulation: suggested amendments to the definition of personal data’ eu Law Analysis (15 October 2014) available online at http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.nl/2014/10/the-proposed-general-data-protection.html.

  • 33

    See F.J. Zuiderveen Borgesius (2015) Improving Privacy Protection in the area of Behavioural Targeting PhD thesis University of Amsterdam Amsterdam 2014 Deventer: Kluwer 2015.

  • 37

    Dutch Supreme Court 29 June 2006ecli:nl:hr:2007:az4663 (Dexia) para. 34.

Information

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 51 51 22
Full Text Views 146 146 24
PDF Downloads 11 11 0
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0