| Nowadays,all countries and regions in the world have entered the era of global economic and trade integration.Their economic and trade exchanges have become more frequent and their contacts have become closer.The rapid development of network information technology has made transnational companies more efficient in processing personal data in the course of conducting business activities,and has further increased the profits of enterprises.However,because of the enormous value of personal data,various countries have adopted different degrees of restrictions on cross-border transmission of personal data based on their own interests.They have adopted relevant legislation to protect their personal data.Due to the lack of a unified standard,personal data are hindered in the cross-border transmission process,which greatly limits the economic efficiency.To this end,some countries and regions in the world have actively negotiated and negotiated,signed and entered into force a series of legal documents,found a suitable balance between the legal protection of personal data and cross-border transmission,and produced good results.At present,there are two main cross-border personal data transmission models in the world.They are the "EU model" based on the principle of "full protection" and the "APEC model" based on the principle of "accountability".There are large differences between the models,each with its own advantages and disadvantages.However,the value orientation,system design,and practical experience of the two models are worthy of further learning and learning.At present,China's personal data cross-border transmissionmode is not yet complete.Facing the two most representative transmission modes in the world,how to draw lessons from experience and strengths,and at the same time,combine China's national conditions to improve the cross-border transmission mode of personal data in China is an urgent need to solve the problem.The first chapter of this article is mainly about the cross-border transmission of personal data in China.First of all,it elaborates on the legal recognition of "transportation of personal data across borders";secondly,through the current status of legislation on cross-border transmission of personal data in China,we point out that China's individual Cross-border data transmission mode is still incomplete,so how to improve it? At the end of this chapter,the author believes that there are currently two most typical modes of cross-border personal data transmission in the world.Although the two models differ greatly,they have important reference values ? ? for various countries.China can compare and analyze the advantages and disadvantages of the two transmission modes,and combine its own national conditions to learn the most valuable and suitable institutional experience for China's basic situation,so as to improve the cross-border transmission of personal data in China more reasonably and effectively.The second chapter of this article mainly analyzes the "EU model" of one of the two major transmission modes.The principle of "full protection" is adopted in the EU model.The third country receiving data must meet the requirements of "full protection".Due to the relatively high standards of EU's "full protection",only a few countries can meet this requirement in reality.Therefore,the EU has provided two exceptions,"appropriate safeguards" and "statutory exceptions," as a supplement to further expand the scope of application and flexibility of the "protection" principle.In addition,the United States,as an important trading partner of the European Union,does not meet the requirement of "full protection".The United States and Europe have successively signed "Safe Harbor" and "Privacy Shield" in order to resolve the contradiction between the cross-border transmission of personal data.The agreement has achieved certain results.Finally,this chapter analyzes the inadequacies of the EU model in terms of regulatory agencies ? data controllers and data subjects,and proposes relevant recommendations.The third chapter of this article mainly analyzes another mode of transmission outside the "EU model"-the "APEC model" based on the principle of "accountability".It mainly discusses the "APEC Privacy Protection Framework" and the CBPR system.As the core of the "accountability" principle,CBPR has designed the system from three aspects: privacy law enforcement agencies ? accountability agencies and enterprises,avoiding cumbersome and complicated procedures for EU safety certification,and relying more on corporate self-discipline.Provide more space for business activities.Of course,there are also some deficiencies in the "APEC model",including the exclusion of responsible parties and some social concerns caused by the principle of accountability.Finally,this chapter also makes a detailed comparison of the two typical transmission modes,and focuses on the differences between the two modes in terms of "forced effectiveness" and "core principles and limitations".In spite of this,with the continuous development of global trade integration,the two models have gradually begun to converge.In the fourth chapter of this article,based on the analysis and comparison of the "EU model" and "APEC model" systems in the previous two chapters,we draw the institutional design that is more worthy of our country's learning and learning from the two models.At the same time,combining the basic national conditions of our country,we propose the suggestions for improving the cross-border transmission mode of personal data in China are mainly based on the principle of accountability and the combination of security assessment methods.Among them,the establishment of the principle of accountability requires strict control over the obligations of data controllers;In terms of safety assessment,in addition to the management of classification and classification of data,it is necessary to formulate evaluation criteria in accordance with the provisions of the EU's principle of full protection.Finally,in terms of international cooperation,the rules of corporate self-discipline should be introduced to actively participate in the CBPR system. |
PDF Full Text Request