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 .