Digitalk#39 Session 2 Talk 7 : Risks, Rights and Rules-The European Approach to Data Regulation

Yogyakarta, April 30th, 2020— Series of Digitalk #39 conducted by Center for Digital Society (CfDS) was closed with the seventh talk series entitled “Risks, Rights and Rules-The European Approach to Data Regulation”. In this session, CfDS invited a communication and media expert from Berlin, Germany as the speaker of the discussion, Ingo Dachwitz. Alongside being a communication scientist, Ingo Dachwitz also works as a reporter and editor at netzpolitik.org, a blog which mostly discusses topics about technology, politics, and digital rights.

The seventh talk series held by CfDS was released through YouTube platform on the CfDS UGM channel with 40-minutes duration. In the session, Ingo Dachwitz began his explanation with a brief introduction to the European approach to the personal data economy. In such circumstances, Ingo explained the protection of personal data in Europe, commonly known as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). This regulation is a comprehensive law in which it contains 99 articles with hundreds of paragraphs accompanied by 173 legal readings. GDPR itself has set standards for personal data regulation, where it becomes a reference point for various countries, namely from India to the United States.

Discussing over the GDPR, Ingo explained the law into three discussion concepts which consisted of rights, rules, and risks. According to his explanation, he mentioned two different objectives of GDPR, the protection of personal data and economy deliberations. Regarding the personal data protection, it characterised as a fundamental right which further protects other rights as well. Moreover, related to economy considerations, GDPR is an objective form of economic law. This is an important part of the European Union/EU’s project to create Europe as a single digital market.

At the end of the discussion, Ingo explained several conclusions. First, GDPR is a political compromise. In this case, there is a large lobby where public data protection is actually a form of compromise. Second, GDPR does not prohibit the use of personal data in general but enforces a regime of rules, rights, and supervisions. Furthermore, GDPR is a form of the neoliberal approach to economic data, which there is no red line of a positive vision of how (not) to use personal data, but it is receptive to individual choices. Thus, GDPR has not fulfilled what it promised. In this case, GDPR still requires the adoption and enforcement of appropriate law rather than a permanent solution for economic and personal data, GDPR should be considered as a starting point.