Swift: the three scenarios considered by the Commission C

veryone has had the opportunity to comment on the blocking of "Swift
" by the European Parliament. MEPs have decided, on February 11, to vote against the agreement that allowed U.S. authorities to access the data bank of the Europeans.
Once again, the European Parliament affirms its authority
growing, forcing the United States and the 27 back around the negotiating table. It may be interesting in this context, take a look at the three communiques, that I reveal here
, prepared by the European Commission just before the vote.
The EU executive had considered three scenarios: the postponement of the European Parliament's vote, a vote or the rejection of Swift by politicians.
Scenario number 1: Parliament postponed its vote, Swift continues to be provisionally applied. The Commission is committed to making progress "fast" on a new long-term agreement. For this, the Commissioner for Internal Affairs Cecilia Malmström promises that negotiations with the United States will open soon.
Scenario No. 2: MEPs approve the agreement Swift. The Council can now take the next step: the conclusion of the Interim Agreement. Cecilia Malmström welcomes Parliament's vote, and on progress in the fight "effective" against terrorism. It stresses the importance attached to the "protection of fundamental rights and civil liberties."
Scenario No. 3 (which was actually done): The EU-US agreement on data bank will not take effect immediately. "The Commission regrets" the decision, and everyone is forced to return to the negotiating table.
In all three cases, the Justice Commissioner, Viviane Reding stressed the importance of the European Parliament vote, and emphasizes the role of elected officials. In short, it flatters the Parliament.
If the forced passage of the Parliament is undeniable, it can also read this vote as an action rather cons-productive. Certainly, MEPs get the Interim Agreement EU-USA are removed. But they do not facilitate the task of negotiators.
The text was rejected because planned to last nine months. In the meantime, states were required to work on the terms of the agreement. But Parliament's vote will force 27 and the European Commission to conclude a final agreement directly in haste, under pressure from the United States. And it is not certain that this haste helps protect data, initially endorsed by elected officials.