Developing a European standard for international data transfers after Snowden

Opinion 1/15 on the EU-Canada PNR agreement

Monika Zalnieriute

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)


In Opinion 1/15 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) held that the proposed EU‐Canada Passenger Name Record (PNR) agreement must be revised because parts of it are incompatible with the EU fundamental rights framework. This note argues that the significance of Opinion 1/15 can only be understood in the broader historical context of increasing international securitisation between the 9/11 attacks in 2001 and the Snowden revelations in 2013. Opinion 1/15 emerges as a powerful addition to the existing data privacy trilogy established by the CJEU in the post‐Snowden era in an attempt to re‐balance the terms of international cooperation in data‐sharing between the EU and other countries. These terms were largely modelled around national security interests that have gained significant prominence in the aftermath of 9/11. While pro‐securitisation policies have been successful in gaining support among private and public actors, it is doubtful whether the CJEU pushback – without political support from EU Commission and Member States ‐ will achieve similar success.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1046-1063
Number of pages18
JournalThe Modern Law Review
Issue number6
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2018
Externally publishedYes


  • Data protection
  • EU law
  • International data transfers
  • International relations
  • PNR
  • Privacy

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Developing a European standard for international data transfers after Snowden: Opinion 1/15 on the EU-Canada PNR agreement'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this