GDPR Opinion of the Board
- Categories Blog, Free Data Protection Resources
- Date August 29, 2020
Article 64 GDPR
Opinion of the Board
1. The Board shall issue an opinion where a competent supervisory authority intends to adopt any of the measures below. To that end, the competent supervisory authority shall communicate the draft decision to the Board, when it:
(a) aims to adopt a list of the processing operations subject to the requirement for a data protection impact assessment pursuant to Article 35(4);
(b) concerns a matter pursuant to Article 40(7) whether a draft code of conduct or an amendment or extension to a code of conduct complies with this Regulation;
(c) aims to approve the requirements for accreditation of a body pursuant to Article 41(3), of a certification body pursuant to Article 43(3) or the criteria for certification referred to in Article 42(5);
(d) aims to determine standard data protection clauses referred to in point (d) of Article 46(2) and in Article 28(8);
(e) aims to authorise contractual clauses referred to in point (a) of Article 46(3); or
(f) aims to approve binding corporate rules within the meaning of Article 47.
2. Any supervisory authority, the Chair of the Board or the Commission may request that any matter of general application or producing effects in more than one Member State be examined by the Board with a view to obtaining an opinion, in particular where a competent supervisory authority does not comply with the obligations for mutual assistance in accordance with Article 61 or for joint oper ations in accordance with Article 62.
3. In the cases referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, the Board shall issue an opinion on the matter submitted to it provided that it has not already issued an opinion on the same matter. That opinion shall be adopted within eight weeks by simple majority of the members of the Board. That period may be extended by a further six weeks, taking into account the complexity of the subject matter. Regarding the draft decision referred to in paragraph 1 circulated to the members of the Board in accordance with paragraph 5, a member which has not objected within a reasonable period indicated by the Chair, shall be deemed to be in agreement with the draft decision.
4. Supervisory authorities and the Commission shall, without undue delay, communicate by electronic means to the Board, using a standardised format any relevant information, including as the case may be a summary of the facts, the draft decision, the grounds which make the enactment of such measure necessary, and the views of other supervisory authorities concerned.
5. The Chair of the Board shall, without undue, delay inform by electronic means:
(a) the members of the Board and the Commission of any relevant information which has been communicated to it using a standardised format. The secretariat of the Board shall, where necessary, provide translations of relevant information; and
(b) the supervisory authority referred to, as the case may be, in para graphs 1 and 2, and the Commission of the opinion and make it public.
6. The competent supervisory authority referred to in paragraph 1 shall not adopt its draft decision referred to in paragraph 1 within the period referred to in paragraph 3.
7. The competent supervisory authority referred to in paragraph 1 shall take utmost account of the opinion of the Board and shall, within two weeks after receiving the opinion, communicate to the Chair of the Board by electronic means whether it will maintain or amend its draft decision and, if any, the amended draft decision, using a standardised format.
8. Where the competent supervisory authority referred to in paragraph 1 informs the Chair of the Board within the period referred to in paragraph 7 of this Article that it does not intend to follow the opinion of the Board, in whole or in part, providing the relevant grounds, Article 65(1) shall apply.
Professor mr drs Romeo F. Kadir MA MSc LLM LLM (Adv) EMBA EMoC
At present Romeo Kadir serves as the President of the Global Association of Data Protection Professionals Europe (GADPPRO). GADPPRO is a thought leader self-regulatory association of data protection professionals based in the European Union, active around the globe and the first European Association of data protection professionals open for members outside the EU. Please visit www.gadppro.org for more information.
First appointed Data Protection Officer (DPO) ever in the Netherlands (European Union) at a semi-public entity. Seasoned European Privacy and Data Protection Expert (22+ years of practical experience in EU Privacy and Data Protection Law, Business Management, Compliance and Ethics).
Studied European and International Law, Political Sciences and Business Administration. Romeo Kadir is EIPACC EADPP Professor European Privacy & Data Protection Law at Universitas Padjadjaran UNpad (Indonesia) and Honorary Visiting Research Fellow with O.P. Jindal Global University (New Delhi), Senior Associate Fellow with Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy (New Delhi), Lecturer Science Honours Academy and Lecturer at the International Molengraaff Institute, Utrecht University (UU, Netherlands). In 2010 he was founder of the first European Data Protection Academy focusing on privacy-only executive education.
Present Occupations in European Data Protection Law
Member of the International Bar Association (IBA)
Member of the International Board of Experts with EuroPrivacy Certification Scheme (Geneva and Luxembourg)
Member of the International Strategic Board with EuroPrivacy Certification Scheme (Geneva and Luxembourg)
Member of the Swiss-Chinese Law Association (SCLA)
Former Occupations in European Data Protection Law
President European Institute for Privacy, Audit, Compliance & Certification (EIPACC)
Co-Founder/Vice-President European Association for Data Protection Professionals (EADPP)
Chair EADPP Certification Committee Data Protection Professionals,
Chair EADPP Academic Board
Chair EADPP Expert Committee on Cybersecurity
Chair EADPP Expert Committee on Artificial Intelligence (AI)
President Supervisory Board of the Dutch Privacy Complaints Office (NPKI)
Rapporteur to UN Monitoring Commission Human Rights on behalf of the Dutch Privacy Foundation (SPN)
Publications
'Handbook DPO - A Practical Guide', Privacy Publishing Group (2017)
Editor-in-Chief of ‘Data Protection Dictionary’, authored, edited and coordinated ‘Handbook for the Data Protection Officer – A practical Guide’, ‘The Ultimate GDPR Business Guide – Six Volumes’ and other relevant books in the field of privacy and data protection (www.dataprotectionbooks.com)
www.romeokadir.eu
You may also like
Guidelines 9/2020 on relevant and reasoned objection under Regulation 2016/679 Paragraph 3.2.3 Risks to free flow of personal data within the Union 44. Where the objection will refer to this particular risk, the CSA will need to clarify why it …
Guidelines 9/2020 on relevant and reasoned objection under Regulation 2016/679 Paragraph 3.2.2 Risks to fundamental rights and freedoms of data subjects 39. The issue at stake concerns the impact the draft decision as a whole would have on the data …
Guidelines 9/2020 on relevant and reasoned objection under Regulation 2016/679 Paragraph 3.2.1 Meaning of “significance of the risks” 35. It is important to bear in mind that the goal of the work carried out by SAs is that of protecting …