EU Law: Attorney-General claims storing telecoms data essential in combating terrorism

Europe's lawyers were on a collision course with the UK presidency of the European Union this week, when they strongly opposed British proposals to strengthen data retention rules to combat terrorism.


The leaders of the Council of Law Societies and Bars of the EU (CCBE) called on MEPs to amend a draft directive on the retention of telecommunications data, to protect legal professional privilege.


According to the CCBE, the draft directive, which has the strong backing of the UK government, 'does not differentiate between different kinds of data' and therefore could include conversations between lawyers and their clients.


An EC proposed directive would require service providers in member countries to retain telephone data for one year and Internet data for six months. Currently, data retention rules vary widely throughout the EU, with some countries &150; such as Germany &150; not having any provisions at all.


In a letter to the EU parliament, CCBE President Bernard Vatier said: 'The fact of a government or law enforcement agency being able to know when, where, and how many times a person consults his/her lawyer... seriously challenges the confidentiality of the lawyer-client relationship and even the exercise of the right of defence itself.'


An official with the Law Society's international department said that Chancery Lane gave firm backing to the CCBE's position.


The issue came to a head in Paris at last week's bi-annual CCBE plenary session. Attorney-General Lord Goldsmith adamantly defended the British government's position that tougher telecommunications data retention rules were essential in the fight against terror.


He refuted suggestions that the move would be a breach of the European Convention on Human Rights. 'This is not about the content of conversations,' said Lord Goldsmith. 'We are just concerned about the numbers, duration and location of communications. And I am not personally convinced that professional secrecy prevents the authorities from knowing that a suspect has seen or communicated with a lawyer.'


Indeed, Lord Goldsmith maintained that without telecommunications data information, one of the suspects involved in the alleged 21 July attempted bombings in London would not have been arrested.


But last year's CCBE president, German lawyer Hans-Jurgen Hellwig, countered, saying there were countries within the EU where it would be a criminal offence for a lawyer to divulge even the name of a client.