Learn how GA4GH helps expand responsible genomic data use to benefit human health.
Learn how GA4GH helps expand responsible genomic data use to benefit human health.
Our Strategic Road Map defines strategies, standards, and policy frameworks to support responsible global use of genomic and related health data.
Discover how a meeting of 50 leaders in genomics and medicine led to an alliance uniting more than 5,000 individuals and organisations to benefit human health.
GA4GH Inc. is a not-for-profit organisation that supports the global GA4GH community.
To guide our collaborative, globe-spanning alliance, GA4GH relies on a Standards Steering Committee and an Executive Committee.
The Funders Forum brings together organisations that offer both financial support and strategic guidance.
The EDI Advisory Group responds to issues raised in the GA4GH community, finding equitable, inclusive ways to build products that benefit diverse groups.
Distributed across four Host Institutions, our staff team supports the mission and operations of GA4GH.
Curious who we are? Meet the people and organisations across six continents who make up GA4GH.
More than 500 organisations connected to genomics — in healthcare, research, patient advocacy, industry, and beyond — have signed onto the mission and vision of GA4GH as Organisational Members.
These core Organisational Members are genomic data initiatives that have committed resources to guide GA4GH work and pilot our products.
This subset of Organisational Members whose networks or infrastructure align with GA4GH priorities has made a long-term commitment to engaging with our community.
Local and national organisations assign experts to spend at least 30% of their time building GA4GH products.
Anyone working in genomics and related fields is invited to participate in our inclusive community by creating and using new products.
Wondering what GA4GH does? Learn how we find and overcome challenges to expanding responsible genomic data use for the benefit of human health.
Study Groups define needs. Participants survey the landscape of the genomics and health community and determine whether GA4GH can help.
Work Streams create products. Community members join together to develop technical standards, policy frameworks, and policy tools that overcome hurdles to international genomic data use.
GIF solves problems. Organisations in the forum pilot GA4GH products in real-world situations. Along the way, they troubleshoot products, suggest updates, and flag additional needs.
NIF finds challenges and opportunities in genomics at a global scale. National programmes meet to share best practices, avoid incompatabilities, and help translate genomics into benefits for human health.
Communities of Interest find challenges and opportunities in areas such as rare disease, cancer, and infectious disease. Participants pinpoint real-world problems that would benefit from broad data use.
See all our products — always free and open-source. Do you work on cloud genomics, data discovery, user access, data security or regulatory policy and ethics? Need to represent genomic, phenotypic, or clinical data? We’ve got a solution for you.
All GA4GH standards, frameworks, and tools follow the Product Development and Approval Process before being officially adopted.
Learn how other organisations have implemented GA4GH products to solve real-world problems.
Help us transform the future of genomic data use! See how GA4GH can benefit you — whether you’re using our products, writing our standards, subscribing to a newsletter, or more.
Help create new global standards and frameworks for responsible genomic data use.
Align your organisation with the GA4GH mission and vision.
Solve your real-world data problems with support from this valuable network of global institutions.
Work with like-minded groups committed to better data use in areas like rare disease, cancer, and infectious disease.
Share your thoughts on all GA4GH products currently open for public comment.
Solve real problems by aligning your organisation with the world’s genomics standards. We offer software dvelopers both customisable and out-of-the-box solutions to help you get started.
Learn more about upcoming GA4GH events. See reports and recordings from our past events.
Speak directly to the global genomics and health community while supporting GA4GH strategy.
Be the first to hear about the latest GA4GH products, upcoming meetings, new initiatives, and more.
Questions? We would love to hear from you.
Read news, stories, and insights from the forefront of genomic and clinical data use.
Attend an upcoming GA4GH event, or view meeting reports from past events.
See new projects, updates, and calls for support from the Work Streams.
Read academic papers coauthored by GA4GH contributors.
Listen to our podcast OmicsXchange, featuring discussions from leaders in the world of genomics, health, and data sharing.
Check out our videos, then subscribe to our YouTube channel for more content.
View the latest GA4GH updates, Genomics and Health News, Implementation Notes, GDPR Briefs, and more.
Discover all things GA4GH: explore our news, events, videos, podcasts, announcements, publications, and newsletters.
8 Sep 2020
The European Court of Justice’s Schrems II judgment on 16 July 2020 has both invalidated the EU Commission’s adequacy decision on the EU-US Privacy Shield and strengthened obligations on anyone transferring data out of the European Economic Area. This brief focuses on the latter issue.
The European Court of Justice’s Schrems II judgment on 16 July 2020 has both invalidated the EU Commission’s adequacy decision on the EU-US Privacy Shield and strengthened obligations on anyone transferring data out of the European Economic Area (EEA). This brief focuses on the latter issue.
Increased difficulty in relying on standard contractual clauses
The decision establishes that standard contractual clauses (SCCs) must provide for an “essentially equivalent” level of data protection as that of the GDPR (which, per the GDPR itself, is a requirement for transfers pursuant to an adequacy decision). To make this determination, both data exporters and importers using SCCs must examine aspects beyond the metaphorical four corners of the contract, such as how government security services may access data or whether effective remedies exist for data subjects in the data importer’s jurisdiction. (Indeed, some call these exercises “mini adequacy decisions”.)
Furthermore, whether personal data is transferable using SCCs depends on the data exporter’s assessment, accounting for transfer circumstances and potential supplementary measures. Obviously, the difficulty of assessing third-country data protection levels and defining supplementary measures on a transfer-by-transfer basis is extreme. The European Data Protection Board is currently investigating which measures could be provided alongside SCCs. Data protection by design and default presents an attractive solution, including verifiable data encryption. However, where the level of protection in the third country is inadequate, the recipient could be unable to access or use the data, excluding most collaborative research but potentially enabling cooperation with cloud storage providers.
If the requisite level of data protection cannot be assured, the transfer must be suspended outright. Similarly, competent supervisory authorities (SAs) must, absent an adequacy decision, suspend or prohibit the transfer of personal data to a third country where they believe the SCCs are not or cannot be complied with, or where the required level of data protection cannot be otherwise ensured. These obligations place a burden on SAs, who may need financial or other support to realize these tasks (It may nevertheless become easier after an initial assessment is done to stay abreast of relevant changes for future assessments.)
Implications for other transfer mechanisms
The decision further means that the conditions for the application of other safeguards will also depend on the level of data protection in the third country. This does not obviate the as-yet unused measures under Article 46 GDPR, e.g., Codes of Conduct (CoC), as they may contribute to standardized data sharing in genomic research. It does, however, require that CoC drafters take into account relevant characteristics of third countries’ legal orders.
Should none of these transfer mechanisms be applicable, certain derogations for transfer may be available (e.g., explicit consent to the transfer itself) though only on a case-by-case basis. Some standardization might be possible via consent forms, however the data subject must be informed of the specific risks of transfers to third countries without adequate protection.
Many SAs see the Court’s judgment as a motivation to find data processing solutions within the EEA, and even claim the decision dovetails with the Commission’s data strategy. Nevertheless, cloistered “data jurisdictions” are undesirable, especially in the case of research types that rely on data from participants in disparate geographies, as is the case with rare disease research. Because of this, the ruling’s impact on transfers to international organizations, comprising also research institutions, needs further clarification. Work is needed to promote the free flow of data, measured not only by theoretical legal compliance but also by options for factual compliance, upholding the spirit of the GDPR.
Relevant GDPR provisions:
Fruzsina Molnar-Gabor is research group leader at the Heidelberg Academy of Sciences and Humanities and lecturer at the Legal Faculty of Heidelberg University.
Michael Beauvais works at McGill University’s Centre of Genomics and Policy.
For a list of previous briefs, please consult here.
Please note that GDPR Briefs neither constitute nor should be relied upon as legal advice. Briefs represent a consensus position among Forum Members regarding the current understanding of the GDPR and its implications for genomic and health-related research. As such, they are no substitute for legal advice from a licensed practitioner in your jurisdiction.