17 December 2019
"Overall, the Court’s pronouncements should not be viewed outside the specific context of the case at hand, i.e they should not be understood as generally applicable to the processing of biometric data for immigration law purposes. The Court’s approach favours national prerogatives in managing third-country nationals through data surveillance policies as it allows a significant margin of discretion for Member States."
Is Processing Biometric Data of Turkish Nationals in a National Database Lawful under the EEC-Turkey Agreement? Reflections on the Judgment in A, B and P (C-70/18) (eumigrationlawblog.eu, link):
"What is worrisome though is that despite the efforts to distinguish biometric data from other categories of personal data, the Court is reluctant to highlight not only their undoubted benefits, but also their significant limitations, such as the potential for false hits."
See: Judgment, full-text (pdf)
Spotted an error? If you've spotted a problem with this page, just click once to let us know.
Statewatch does not have a corporate view, nor does it seek to create one, the views expressed are those of the author. Statewatch is not responsible for the content of external websites and inclusion of a link does not constitute an endorsement. Registered UK charity number: 1154784. Registered UK company number: 08480724. Registered company name: The Libertarian Research & Education Trust. Registered office: c/o MDR, 88 Fleet Street, London EC4Y 1DH, UK. © Statewatch ISSN 1756-851X. Personal usage as private individuals "fair dealing" is allowed. We also welcome links to material on our site. Usage by those working for organisations is allowed only if the organisation holds an appropriate licence from the relevant reprographic rights organisation (eg: Copyright Licensing Agency in the UK) with such usage being subject to the terms and conditions of that licence and to local copyright law.