EU: A decision by the EU to provide airline passenger data to the US authorities to help in the "war on terror" should be annulled, a key legal adviser to the European Court of Justice said yesterday.
Advocate general Philippe Leger ruled that decisions made by the European Commission and the EU's Council in May 2004 to approve the transfer of data held by airlines on travellers to the US from Europe were illegal.
"Neither the council decision approving the agreement nor the commission decision holding that information to be sufficiently protected by the US has adequate legal base," said Mr Leger in an opinion to the court.
Since February 2003 airlines flying into the US have been providing electronic access to information on their passengers to the US immigration authorities as part of a package of anti-terrorism measures.
The passenger name record (PNR) data provided includes 34 separate items, such as names, address, credit card details, contact persons, meal choices and any notes made by airline staff.
Yesterday's ruling, not binding on the European Court of Justice, represents a victory for the European parliament.
It had asked the court to consider the EU-US deal because of concerns that it infringed EU citizens' privacy and data protection rights.
Mr Leger's opinion is based on the principle that the agreement goes beyond the powers of the EU, as it involves issues of security and the fight against terror, which are the preserve of national governments.
However, the advocate general argued that the agreement on passenger data did not breach passengers' privacy.
Philip Nolan, a solicitor with Mason Hayes Curran, who specialises in data protection law, said that if the court followed the opinion it could ultimately mean a defeat for privacy interests. Airlines in the EU could send passenger information to the US without a special arrangement.
This would occur if governments agreed to provide the data or the EU was able to find a legal basis for the agreement.
The European Court of Justice will now hear the full case and make a ruling in the first half of 2006. It follows the advocate general's opinion in about 80 per cent of cases.
European parliamentarians welcomed the opinion yesterday.
"I am delighted with this opinion," said Sophie Int'Veld, rapporteur on the issue for the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats group in the European parliament.
"It is a moral victory for those who are concerned about security as well as democracy and civil rights.
"Security measures must meet the highest standards of civil liberties and democratic scrutiny and not via a back-door construction."
A spokesman for the commission said it would make no comment until the final decision of the court was announced.
Meanwhile, the US argues that the information is necessary to help track down potential terrorists and ease its immigration procedures.
It lobbied the EU strongly following the September 11th terrorist attacks before finally agreeing a deal last year.