Since the last CPDP, the U.S. has enacted the Cloud Act, and the Commission has published its proposed E-Evidence Directive and Regulation. These law and policy changes result from a technological change – the shift to cloud computing. Evidence of crimes used to exist locally; today it is very often stored in a different jurisdiction. This panel highlights global experts on these issues, which call for: (i) responses to legitimate law enforcement requests; (ii) the need to promote privacy and human rights as essential to new legal approaches; (iii) a workable regime for companies holding the data; and (iv) risks to the global Internet from pervasive data localization.
• What are the advantages and disadvantages of the Cloud Act and E-Evidence approaches compared with Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties and European Production Orders?
• What are the advantages and disadvantages, concerning privacy and human rights protections, of the new proposed regimes? How might these protections be improved?
• What should be the role for electronic service providers in reviewing (and perhaps contesting) direct law enforcement requests under these new regimes?
• More countries have implemented (China, Russia, Vietnam) or are considering implementing (India, Indonesia) data localization requirements. To what extent can new law enforcement regimes such as Cloud Act and E-Evidence address the perceived need in these and other countries for data localization?