effects, since its mandatory force and effects are pervasive and it introduces the
whole European standards and principles in the agreement with no need for a
specific chapter, albeit achieving similar results.
The EU-Georgia FTA (2014), though negotiated and signed in the same context
as the Moldova and the Ukraine treaties, does not hold a specific chapter on the issue,
although it contains scattered provisions on data protection throughout its text and a
general regime in the Annex I,
14 which incorporates the European regime on the
issue into the agreement. Separate articles concern cooperation against terrorism,
15
electronic commerce,
16 and civil enforcement.
17 The Japan-Singapore FTA (2002)
reasonable step to ensure, as appropriate, the rectification, erasure or blocking of personal data
where the processing does not comply with the provisions of Article 13 of this Agreement, in
particular because those data are not adequate, relevant, or accurate, or because they are excessive in
relation to the purpose of processing. This includes the notification of any rectification, erasure or
blocking to the other Party; (b) upon request, the receiving authority shall inform the transferring
authority of the use of the transferred data and of the results obtained there-from; (c) personal data
may only be transferred to the competent authorities. Further transfer to other authorities requires
the prior authorisation of the transferring authority; (d) the transferring and the receiving authorities
are under an obligation to make a written record of the communication and receipt of personal data.”
14 EU-GEO FTA, Annex I: “Each Party shall, in the context of the implementation of this or other
Agreements, ensure a legal level of data protection which at least corresponds to that set out in
Directive ECUADOR 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, as well as the Council of Europe Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard
to Automatic Processing of Personal Data, signed on 28 January 1981 (ETS No. 108) and the
Additional Protocol thereto, regarding Supervisory Authorities and Transborder Data Flows, signed
on 8 November 2001 (ETS No. 181). Where relevant, each party shall take into account Council
Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA of 27 November 2008 on the protection of personal data
processed in the framework of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, and Recommendation No R (87)15 of 17 September 1987 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe
Regulating the Use of Personal Data in the Police Sector.”
15 EU-GEO FTA, Article 20 (1) (b): “1. In full accordance with the principles underlying the fight
against terrorism as set out in Article 12 of this Agreement, the Parties reaffirm the importance of a
law enforcement and judicial approach to the fight against terrorism and agree to cooperate in the
prevention and suppression of terrorism in particular by: (. . .) (b) exchanging information on
terrorist groups and individuals and their support networks, in accordance with international and
national law, in particular as regards data protection and the protection of privacy;”
16 EU-GEO FTA, Article 127 (2): “Objectives and principles. (. . .) 2. The Parties agree that the
development of electronic commerce must be compatible with the international standards of data
protection in order to ensure the confidence of users of electronic commerce.”
17 EU-GEO FTA, Article 200 (5): “Border measures. (. . .) 5. The Parties agree to effectively
implement Article 69 of the TRIPS Agreement in respect of international trade in goods suspected
of infringing intellectual property rights. For that purpose, the Parties shall establish and notify
contact points in their customs administrations and shall be ready to exchange data and information
on trade in such goods affecting both Parties. They shall, in particular, promote the exchange of
information and cooperation between customs authorities with regard to trade in counterfeit
trademark goods and pirated copyright goods. Without prejudice to the provisions of Protocol II
on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Customs Matters to this Agreement customs authorities
shall, where appropriate, exchange such information swiftly and with due respect to data protection
laws of the Parties.”
Data Protection in International Trade Law
491
whole European standards and principles in the agreement with no need for a
specific chapter, albeit achieving similar results.
The EU-Georgia FTA (2014), though negotiated and signed in the same context
as the Moldova and the Ukraine treaties, does not hold a specific chapter on the issue,
although it contains scattered provisions on data protection throughout its text and a
general regime in the Annex I,
14 which incorporates the European regime on the
issue into the agreement. Separate articles concern cooperation against terrorism,
15
electronic commerce,
16 and civil enforcement.
17 The Japan-Singapore FTA (2002)
reasonable step to ensure, as appropriate, the rectification, erasure or blocking of personal data
where the processing does not comply with the provisions of Article 13 of this Agreement, in
particular because those data are not adequate, relevant, or accurate, or because they are excessive in
relation to the purpose of processing. This includes the notification of any rectification, erasure or
blocking to the other Party; (b) upon request, the receiving authority shall inform the transferring
authority of the use of the transferred data and of the results obtained there-from; (c) personal data
may only be transferred to the competent authorities. Further transfer to other authorities requires
the prior authorisation of the transferring authority; (d) the transferring and the receiving authorities
are under an obligation to make a written record of the communication and receipt of personal data.”
14 EU-GEO FTA, Annex I: “Each Party shall, in the context of the implementation of this or other
Agreements, ensure a legal level of data protection which at least corresponds to that set out in
Directive ECUADOR 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, as well as the Council of Europe Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard
to Automatic Processing of Personal Data, signed on 28 January 1981 (ETS No. 108) and the
Additional Protocol thereto, regarding Supervisory Authorities and Transborder Data Flows, signed
on 8 November 2001 (ETS No. 181). Where relevant, each party shall take into account Council
Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA of 27 November 2008 on the protection of personal data
processed in the framework of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, and Recommendation No R (87)15 of 17 September 1987 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe
Regulating the Use of Personal Data in the Police Sector.”
15 EU-GEO FTA, Article 20 (1) (b): “1. In full accordance with the principles underlying the fight
against terrorism as set out in Article 12 of this Agreement, the Parties reaffirm the importance of a
law enforcement and judicial approach to the fight against terrorism and agree to cooperate in the
prevention and suppression of terrorism in particular by: (. . .) (b) exchanging information on
terrorist groups and individuals and their support networks, in accordance with international and
national law, in particular as regards data protection and the protection of privacy;”
16 EU-GEO FTA, Article 127 (2): “Objectives and principles. (. . .) 2. The Parties agree that the
development of electronic commerce must be compatible with the international standards of data
protection in order to ensure the confidence of users of electronic commerce.”
17 EU-GEO FTA, Article 200 (5): “Border measures. (. . .) 5. The Parties agree to effectively
implement Article 69 of the TRIPS Agreement in respect of international trade in goods suspected
of infringing intellectual property rights. For that purpose, the Parties shall establish and notify
contact points in their customs administrations and shall be ready to exchange data and information
on trade in such goods affecting both Parties. They shall, in particular, promote the exchange of
information and cooperation between customs authorities with regard to trade in counterfeit
trademark goods and pirated copyright goods. Without prejudice to the provisions of Protocol II
on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Customs Matters to this Agreement customs authorities
shall, where appropriate, exchange such information swiftly and with due respect to data protection
laws of the Parties.”
Data Protection in International Trade Law
491