Balancing Personal Data Protection with Other Human Rights and Public Interest: Between Theory and Practice

The role of balancing in the development and application of European data protection is enormous. European courts widely use it; it is the basis for harmonization of pan-European and national laws, plays a crucial role in everyday data protection. Therefore, the correctness of a huge number of criti...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Justickis Viktoras
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Sciendo 2020-06-01
Series:Baltic Journal of Law & Politics
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.2478/bjlp-2020-0006
id doaj-ca8a36b734e6412f848bf4f3cafd840b
record_format Article
spelling doaj-ca8a36b734e6412f848bf4f3cafd840b2021-09-05T21:00:29ZengSciendoBaltic Journal of Law & Politics2029-04542020-06-0113114016210.2478/bjlp-2020-0006bjlp-2020-0006Balancing Personal Data Protection with Other Human Rights and Public Interest: Between Theory and PracticeJustickis Viktoras0Mykolas Romeris University, School of Law (Lithuania)The role of balancing in the development and application of European data protection is enormous. European courts widely use it; it is the basis for harmonization of pan-European and national laws, plays a crucial role in everyday data protection. Therefore, the correctness of a huge number of critical decisions in the EU depends on the perfection of the balancing method. However, the real ability of the balancing method to cope with this mission has been subjected to intense criticism in the scientific literature. This criticism has highlighted its imperfections and casts doubt on its suitability to optimize the relation between competing rights. Paradoxically, the everyday practice of balancing tends to ignore this criticism. The limitations of the balancing method are typically not discussed and are not taken into account when considering legal cases and solving practical issues. Thus, it is tacitly assumed that the shortcomings and limitations of the balancing method, which the criticism points out, are irrelevant when making real-life decisions. This article discusses the scope of this phenomenon, its manifestations, and its impact on the quality of data protection decisions based on the balancing method:sub-optimality of these decisions, their opacity, public dissatisfaction with the legal regulation, its instability and low authority The ways of bridging the gap between the practice of balancing and science and broader consideration by the practice of the shortcomings of the balancing method identified during scientific discussions are considered.https://doi.org/10.2478/bjlp-2020-0006data protection rightsthe conflict of this right with other human rightsbalancing methodcritics of balancing methodshortcomings of balancing
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Justickis Viktoras
spellingShingle Justickis Viktoras
Balancing Personal Data Protection with Other Human Rights and Public Interest: Between Theory and Practice
Baltic Journal of Law & Politics
data protection rights
the conflict of this right with other human rights
balancing method
critics of balancing method
shortcomings of balancing
author_facet Justickis Viktoras
author_sort Justickis Viktoras
title Balancing Personal Data Protection with Other Human Rights and Public Interest: Between Theory and Practice
title_short Balancing Personal Data Protection with Other Human Rights and Public Interest: Between Theory and Practice
title_full Balancing Personal Data Protection with Other Human Rights and Public Interest: Between Theory and Practice
title_fullStr Balancing Personal Data Protection with Other Human Rights and Public Interest: Between Theory and Practice
title_full_unstemmed Balancing Personal Data Protection with Other Human Rights and Public Interest: Between Theory and Practice
title_sort balancing personal data protection with other human rights and public interest: between theory and practice
publisher Sciendo
series Baltic Journal of Law & Politics
issn 2029-0454
publishDate 2020-06-01
description The role of balancing in the development and application of European data protection is enormous. European courts widely use it; it is the basis for harmonization of pan-European and national laws, plays a crucial role in everyday data protection. Therefore, the correctness of a huge number of critical decisions in the EU depends on the perfection of the balancing method. However, the real ability of the balancing method to cope with this mission has been subjected to intense criticism in the scientific literature. This criticism has highlighted its imperfections and casts doubt on its suitability to optimize the relation between competing rights. Paradoxically, the everyday practice of balancing tends to ignore this criticism. The limitations of the balancing method are typically not discussed and are not taken into account when considering legal cases and solving practical issues. Thus, it is tacitly assumed that the shortcomings and limitations of the balancing method, which the criticism points out, are irrelevant when making real-life decisions. This article discusses the scope of this phenomenon, its manifestations, and its impact on the quality of data protection decisions based on the balancing method:sub-optimality of these decisions, their opacity, public dissatisfaction with the legal regulation, its instability and low authority The ways of bridging the gap between the practice of balancing and science and broader consideration by the practice of the shortcomings of the balancing method identified during scientific discussions are considered.
topic data protection rights
the conflict of this right with other human rights
balancing method
critics of balancing method
shortcomings of balancing
url https://doi.org/10.2478/bjlp-2020-0006
work_keys_str_mv AT justickisviktoras balancingpersonaldataprotectionwithotherhumanrightsandpublicinterestbetweentheoryandpractice
_version_ 1717782903242358784