The processing of personal data is regulated by Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. At the same time, Article 52(1) of the Charter recognizes that restrictions may be imposed on the exercise of this right, and such restrictions must be provided for by law and comply with the principle of proportionality. Thus, according to Recital 4 of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), personal data must be processed in accordance with the principle of proportionality. The lack of specificity regarding how this principle is applied and guided in the field of personal data processing regulation creates a problem of legal uncertainty that requires further clarification on this issue. This study explores the conceptual meaning and specifics of the principle of proportionality, which guides the processing of personal data for the best protection. The study examines how this principle has evolved from the human rights framework to the personal data protection field. The analysis presented in this study offers a new understanding of the principle of proportionality under the GDPR, emphasizing the need for a specific legal mechanism under which the doctrine can adequately serve as a tool for protecting individual data. However, it is worth noting that this legal mechanism can only legitimately operate if it meets specially developed legal criteria. The designed model consists of two key components: First, even if there is a legal basis, if it does not meet the requirement of strict necessity, the processing is considered disproportionate due to the uncertainty of the legal basis. Secondly, if the data protection measures are inadequate, the automatic processing adversely affects the interests of the individual, and therefore, the proportionality principle is not met
The processing of personal data in accordance with the principle of proportionality under EU general data protection regulation
Abstract
Keywords
GDPR; fundamental human right to personal data protection; automotive data processing; balance of interests; purpose limitation; necessity
[1] Amankwaa, A. (2020). Trends in forensic DNA database: Transnational exchange of DNA data. Forensic Sciences Research, 5(1), 8-14. doi: 10.1080/20961790.2019.1565651.
[2] Balboni, P., et al. (2019). Accountability and enforcement aspects of the EU General Data Protection Regulation: Methodology for the creation of an effective compliance framework and a review of recent case law. Indian Journal of Law and Technology, 15, 102.
[3] Brkan, M. (2016). The unstoppable expansion of the EU fundamental right to data protection: Little shop of horrors?. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, 23(5), 812-841. doi: 10.1177/1023263X1602300505.
[4] Bulgakova, D. (2022). The protection of commodified data in e-platforms. Analytical and Comparative Jurisprudence, 1, 208-212. doi: 10.24144/2788-6018.2022.01.39.
[5] Cohen-Eliya, M., & Porat, I. (2010). American balancing and German proportionality: The historical origins. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 8(2), 263-286. doi: 10.1093/icon/moq004.