For this requirement, the agreement recognizes in its preamble that “the respective legal frameworks for access to electronic data contain appropriate and essential safeguards for the protection of privacy and civil liberties.” The agreement also stipulates, in Article 3, paragraph 3, that each party`s domestic law adequately protects privacy and civil liberties, and requires each party to inform the other party of any changes in domestic legislation affecting this provision. It also notes, in Article 9, paragraphs 1 to 2, that the processing of data under contractual orders is fully compatible with the respective laws of each party on privacy and data protection, as well as with the international treaties to which they are parties. In March 2018, Congress passed the CLOUD Act, which authorizes the United States to enter into bilateral executive agreements with partners that remove legal barriers for each party to access electronic data for certain criminal investigations. The agreement was facilitated by the Overseas Production Orders Act 2019, which won royal approval in February of this year. The agreement will enter into force after a six-month review of Congress, provided for by the CLOUD Act, and the corresponding revision by the British Parliament. Finally, the agreement does not require a supplier to be informed that the issuing country has informed a third country. Why does it matter? In most countries, including the United States, it is illegal to intercept the content of a notification unless it has been approved by a specific court or authority. Is there any doubt that the United States, for example, would view the acquisition of the content of the communication by a third country from someone in the United States as a violation of its sovereignty and the Wiretap Act? As a result, U.S. providers that provide accessible services in countries such as Brazil, for example, do not intercept their law enforcement agencies. In fact, in the United States, U.S.-based suppliers do not even tip over the window to intercept a device in Brazil or another country, as the wiretaps are wide under U.S. law. Is there any doubt, then, that a third country will consider such electronic surveillance to be illegal eavesdropping? Just before the deal was signed, the British newspaper Sunday Times reported that the deal would require service providers such as WhatsApp and Facebook to decrypt messages in accordance with a government injunction.

Share →