BELGIUM:LAW ENFORCEMENT AND COUNTERTERRORISM

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 BRUSSELS 000172

C O R R E C T E D COPY: CORRECTED PASS TO LINE

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR S/CT PAUL SCHULTZ
DEPT FOR ERA/ERA ALESSANDRO NARDI
DEPT FOR L/LEI KEN PROPP
DEPT FOR A/GIS/IPS/PRV CHARLENE THOMAS
DEPT OF JUSTICE FOR TOM BURROWS
DHS FOR MIKE SCARDAVILLE AND JOHN KROPF
TREASURY FOR JULIA YOO AND CARLTON GREENE

E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/10/2019
TAGS: PTER KTFN KCRM KHLS ECPS ECON PREL KPAO KTIA
CON, EUN, BE
SUBJECT: BELGIUM:LAW ENFORCEMENT AND COUNTERTERRORISM
INFORMATION SHARING AND DATA PRIVACY ISSUES WITH EUROPE

REF: STATE 8403

Classified By: Acting Deputy Chief of Mission Richard M. Eason.


1. Summary: (C) Poloff discussed reftel points on
counterterrorism and law enforcement with relevant contacts
in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs February 8, the Ministry
of Justice February 9, and the Ministry of Interior February

5. In light of the impending rejection of the Terrorist
Finance Tracking Program (TFTP) agreement by the European
Parliament February 10, MFA Counterterrorism Coordinator
Thomas Baekelandt outlined clear differences with the U.S. on
data privacy issues. He said Europeans would expect actual
changes in U.S. legal codes on redress procedures, guaranteed
erasure of data, and length of time the U.S. holds data. He
suggested Belgium may have to push for these changes during
its upcoming EU Presidency from July 1 to December 31, 2010.
Baekelandt opined that the issue on data privacy for
Europeans was not lack of understanding of U.S. procedures,
but lack of belief that the U.S. is indeed committed to
protecting the privacy of European citizens. Minister of
Justice De Clerck's Diplomatic Advisor Didier Nagant and the
MOJ's data privacy expert Damien Moreau added on February 9
that Europeans would indeed welcome changes to U.S. law and
procedure. Moreau said many are aware that the U.S. has
similar procedures to those in Europe, but there is a
symbolic need for the U.S. to deal with European critiques
and European public opinion. The MOI foreign advisor
Dominique Laurent welcomed the U.S. points on February 5, and
she promised to provide a brief to Minister of Interior
Turtelboom. End Summary.

The United States Should Change its Laws
--------------


2. (C) Usually jovial and optimistic CT Coordinator
Baekelandt was blunt and pessimistic when he met Poloff
February 8 to discuss reftel points. Baekelandt was
instrumental in working out a U.S.-EU compromise on the 1267
committee to meet EU concerns and maintain the integrity of
the U.N. counterterrorism sanctions regime. On data privacy
issues however, he supported the European
Parliament's criticism of U.S. procedures. He said the EU
has highly skilled lawyers that fully understand U.S. laws,
and said explanations of how our procedures are analogous to
European standards would not suffice. He said that
negotiations are a two-way street, and that U.S., not
European, laws and ways of doing things would have to change.
He emphatically added that the problem is not a lack of
understanding, but a lack of belief; Europeans often do not
believe the U.S. treats data privacy
properly. The MOJ's data privacy expert Damien Moreau, who
has worked on U.S.-EU data privacy negotiations for at least
twelve years, said the impending European Parliament vote on
TFTP highlighted the symbolic and public opinion problem
confronting U.S.-EU data sharing procedures. He said that
U.S. negotiators have always said that Congress is
independent of the Executive when the EU pushed for
changes to U.S. privacy law; he questioned whether the
Executive branch of government could make recommendations to
Congress.

Points of Contention
--------------


3. (C) The three main points of contention mentioned by the
MFA, MOJ, and MOI, which are the same ones raised in EP
debates, are:

-- Redress: visible, accessible, obvious, and understandable
processes that can be explained to a
European audience.

-- Erasure: a viable mechanism that confirms data has been
erased after it has been used.

-- Time: changing the length of time the U.S. may hold on to
the data before it is erased

Solution: Experts' Meeting and EP-Congress Outreach
-------------- --------------


BRUSSELS 00000172 002 OF 002



4. (C) Ambassador Baekelandt offered that high-level meetings
between U.S. department secretaries and European ministers
would not solve the data privacy issue. He suggested legal
experts needed to meet to push for changes in the law,
particularly in the United States. He said a serious
technical meeting between such legal experts is needed. He
did not predict a quick solution that would maintain the
current status quo, and lamented that it would be up to the
Belgian rotating EU presidency to see the
needed discussions and changes through. The MOJ's Moreau
suggested that members of the EP be invited to Washington to
meet with members of Congress as a means to discuss a
possible change in U.S. legislation. He opined that meeting
with their counterparts and discussing the public opinion
problem in Europe, might encourage Congress to act.

Belgian Decision Making Officials
--------------


5. (U) The politically relevant individuals in Belgium for
major outreach on law enforcement, data privacy, or any other
political decisions are the five vice prime-ministers. All
Belgian government decisions are first made by consensus
among these five members of the "Core Cabinet." One Vice PM
can effectively veto any legislative, regulatory, or
executive decision. These five are:

-- Vice PM and Minister of Foreign Affairs Steven Vanackere;
Flemish Christian Democrats (CD&V)

-- Vice PM and Minister of Budget Guy Vanhengel; Flemish
Liberals (OpenVLD)

-- Vice PM and Minister of Social Services and Public Health
Laurette Onkelinx; Francophone Socialists (PS)

-- Vice PM and Minister of Finance; Didier Reynders
Francophone Liberals (MR)

-- Vice PM and Minister of Employment and Equal Opportunity
Joelle Milquet; Francophone Center of Democratic Humanists
(CdH)

In addition to these five, the President of the Belgian
Privacy Commission Willem Debeuckelaere could be an
interesting interlocutor.


6. (C) Comment: The tenor of the response by the MFA CT
Coordinator and experts at the MOJ was surprising. GOB
contacts are usually quite mellow, and they generally take
demarche points in stride. The GOB usually proposes ideas
for compromise or suggests means of achieving U.S.-EU
agreement. Ambassador Baekelandt's strident insistence that
U.S. law needed to change was likely a signal that the EU is
prepared to insist on a change in U.S. law. The MOJ
underscored the same point, albeit in a calmer, more
diplomatic manner, pointing out the need for at least
symbolic changes to U.S. law in order to deal with European
public opinion.

GUTMAN
.