Digital Omnibus proposal
Recital 48a
Compare the available Commission, Council and Parliament texts and amendments affecting this recital.
Recital total: 1 part · 0 Council drafts · 2 Parliament amendments
Source notes (1)
- No Commission counterpart is printed for this Parliament-proposed recital.
Removed wording is struck through; added or replacement wording is highlighted.
Institutional text
European Commission proposal
The wording proposed by the Commission at the start of this legislative file.
No standalone Commission wording is mapped to these tracked parts. A newly proposed provision may have no earlier text of its own.
Institutional text
Council Presidency texts
Successive Presidency compromise texts. Their inclusion does not imply agreement or adoption.
No Council wording is mapped to these tracked parts.
Competing proposals
European Parliament amendments
These are alternative tabled amendments. An amendment affecting several tracked parts appears once here, with each target identified.
More filters
Additional proposed wording Amendment 489 · Axel Voss ITRE · LIBE
The free movement of personal data within the Union and the protection of natural persons are objectives of equal rank of this Regulation. Where a provision of this Regulation is open to more than one interpretation in respect of processing privileged under Article 10a, preference is to be given to the interpretation that gives effect to both objectives. The privilege rests on an exchange: the controller or processor obtains a presumption of compliance and relief from documentation duties, and in return makes data available for objectives of general interest; that exchange establishes, in the assessment under Article 52(1) of the Charter, the proportionality of the privilege as a whole. The extent of the data to be made available should be proportionate to the nature and scale of the processing and to the size and capacity of the controller or processor. Standards applied in the market, including international standards, may afford safeguards equivalent to those of approved codes of conduct and certification mechanisms; the Board should include a standard in its list where compliance with the standard is independently verifiable and monitored and where its safeguards afford an equivalent level of protection, and should remove it where those conditions cease to be met. The ordinary commercial activities of a micro, small or medium-sized enterprise do not include the making available of personal data against remuneration as its principal activity. Article 10a provides a basis in Union law for the purposes of points (g) and (j) of Article 9(2); whether the processing is necessary remains to be assessed in the individual case, and the essence of the right to data protection is to be respected in every application of the Article. Specific and substantiated indications require concrete elements relating to the processing in question; the assertion of an infringement does not suffice, and full proof is not required. Standardised information fulfils the purpose of Articles 13 and 14 where it enables data subjects to identify the controller, understand the purposes of the processing and exercise their rights. For transfers to third countries, the presumption leaves intact the requirement that data subjects enjoy a level of protection essentially equivalent to that guaranteed within the Union. The rights of data subjects do not depend on the commitment; its withdrawal ends the privilege for the future and leaves obligations already incurred unaffected. The powers of supervisory authorities and the rights and remedies of data subjects shall remain unaffected.
Justification
This amendment creates an incentive model for data use serving general-interest objectives, such as intra-group administration, SME operations, research, archiving and statistics. Privileged status is limited to actors that make a data-sharing commitment and follow recognised safeguards, including codes, certification, BCRs or listed standards. The rebuttable presumption rewards accountable governance without lowering protection, excludes gatekeepers and VLOPs/VLOSEs, and covers high-risk processing only after a DPIA.
Additional proposed wording Amendment 490 · Bart Groothuis, Ivars Ijabs, Morten Løkkegaard, Sophie Wilmès, Nikola Minchev, Svenja Hahn, Andreas Glück, Katri Kulmuni, João Cotrim De Figueiredo, Ana Vasconcelos ITRE · LIBE
The incident reporting obligations under Union cybersecurity and digital legislation impose a significant administrative burden on entities especially because they have divergent timelines, deadlines, reporting thresholds, and other divergent reporting obligations. A harmonised approach is therefore necessary.
No amendments match these filters.
Selected texts
Compare wording
Choose a tracked part and a named pair of texts. Comparisons are offered only where both sides cover the same legal unit.
Select a specific tracked part above to compare wording.
No same-scope comparison is available for this tracked part. Its source wording remains available in the article text sections.