<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<dc xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/ http://dublincore.org/schemas/xmls/simpledc20021212.xsd">
  <dc:identifier>http://dx.doi.org/10.17176/20220128-180359-0</dc:identifier>
  <dc:identifier>https://verfassungsblog.de/green-light/</dc:identifier>
  <dc:title>A cautious green light for technology-driven mass surveillance - The Advocate General’s Opinion on the PNR Directive</dc:title>
  <dc:creator>Thönnes, Christian</dc:creator>
  <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
  <dc:date>2022-01-28</dc:date>
  <dc:type>electronic resource</dc:type>
  <dc:format>text/html</dc:format>
  <dc:subject>ddc:342</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>passenger name record</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>PNR</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>surveillance</dc:subject>
  <dc:publisher>Verfassungsblog</dc:publisher>
  <dc:relation>Verfassungsblog--2366-7044</dc:relation>
  <dc:rights>CC BY-SA 4.0</dc:rights>
  <dc:description>Yesterday, on 27 January 2022, Advocate General Pitruzzella published his Opinion in the CJEU's preliminary ruling procedure on the PNR Directive and its compatibility with EU primary law. The AG, while criticizing the PNR Directive’s overly broad data retention period and its lack of clarity and precision in certain points, generally considers the PNR Directive to be “compatible with the fundamental rights to respect for private life and to the protection of personal data”. His arguments are not convincing.</dc:description>
</dc>
