The European Parliament supports measures to fight terrorism and improve security, to react to new challenges the European Union is facing. However, the fight against terrorism must neither break the Europeans' fundamental rights, nor constrain freedom of expression say MEPs.
 
How does EP protect your rights?
 
Even if you might like to go without clothes on a beach, you might not want to do that in an airport. Last year, the MEPs opposed the introduction of body scanners in airports (which would produce images of people as if they were naked), considering that this measure would break the fundamental rights of the European citizens.
 
MEPs thought such scans were a grave violation of the right of privacy and a degrading measure. Subsequently the Commission withdrew the proposal and will reconsider it.
 
The EP supports prevention of radicalisation and the emergence of potential terrorists by incriminating public incitement to commit terrorist offences, recruitment for terrorism, and terrorist training. However, MEPs demanded guarantees for freedom of speech while applying these measures.
 
Is Big Brother listening to your phone calls or reading your emails? To help national authorities combat terrorism and organised crime, a new European directive requires telecommunication companies to retain certain call and e-mail data (not content).
 
However, the European Parliament asked the Commission to ensure that data is only retained for serious criminal offences and that the law fully respects the privacy of the telephone and internet users. The MEPs also called for penal sanctions for companies who misuse the retained information.
 
MEPs resist pressure from US over passenger details
 
To combat terrorism, the EU asked in 2004 the European airlines to pass personal information about passengers on planes flying to or through the US – including credit card details, email addresses, telephone numbers, hotel and car reservations, and meal preferences – to US security authorities. MEPs from all sides of the House thought this measure was a breach of privacy and contrary to EU principles and asked the European Court of Justice to annul the agreement; the Court agreed and told the EU to renegotiate the deal.