Article 91 GDPR
Legal Text
1. Where in a Member State, churches and religious associations or communities apply, at the time of entry into force of this Regulation, comprehensive rules relating to the protection of natural persons with regard to processing, such rules may continue to apply, provided that they are brought into line with this Regulation.
2. Churches and religious associations which apply comprehensive rules in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article shall be subject to the supervision of an independent supervisory authority, which may be specific, provided that it fulfils the conditions laid down in Chapter VI of this Regulation.
Relevant Recitals
Recital 4: The processing of personal data should be designed to serve mankind. The right to the protection of personal data is not an absolute right; it must be considered in relation to its function in society and be balanced against other fundamental rights, in accordance with the principle of proportionality. This Regulation respects all fundamental rights and observes the freedoms and principles recognised in the Charter as enshrined in the Treaties, in particular the respect for private and family life, home and communications, the protection of personal data, freedom of thought, conscience and religion, freedom of expression and information, freedom to conduct a business, the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial, and cultural, religious and linguistic diversity.
Recital 54: The processing of special categories of personal data may be necessary for reasons of public interest in the areas of public health without consent of the data subject. Such processing should be subject to suitable and specific measures so as to protect the rights and freedoms of natural persons. In that context, ‘public health’ should be interpreted as defined in Regulation (EC) No 1338/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council (11), namely all elements related to health, namely health status, including morbidity and disability, the determinants having an effect on that health status, health care needs, resources allocated to health care, the provision of, and universal access to, health care as well as health care expenditure and financing, and the causes of mortality. Such processing of data concerning health for reasons of public interest should not result in personal data being processed for other purposes by third parties such as employers or insurance and banking companies.
Recital 55: Moreover, the processing of personal data by official authorities for the purpose of achieving the aims, laid down by constitutional law or by international public law, of officially recognised religious associations, is carried out on grounds of public interest.
Recital 165: This Regulation respects and does not prejudice the status under existing constitutional law of churches and religious associations or communities in the Member States, as recognised in Article 17 TFEU.
Commentary
Religious organizations usually process large quantities of sensitive data, and in particular data relating to religious or philosophical beliefs. As a consequence, it is particularly important that religious organizations comply with data protection law whenever they process personal data in the framework of their religious activities. For historical reasons, however, religious organizations may benefit from a particular status in some Member States, which allows them to apply and adopt their own set of binding rules, distinct from national law. For example, as far as the Roman Catholic Church is concerned, some Member States allow for canon law to apply instead of national law for matters falling within the competences of the church.
Article 91 GDPR takes this reality into account by allowing, under certain circumstances, churches and religious associations or communities to be subject to their own set of data protection rules, distinct from the GDPR. This derogation applies on the conditions that these rules are comprehensive enough, in line with the GDPR, and were already applicable before the entry into force of the GDPR. By contrast, if churches and religious associations or communities did not have a comprehensive set of data protection rules at the time of the entry into force of the GDPR, it must be assumed that the GDPR applies to them in its entirety.
(1) Conditions for the derogation to apply
For the derogation of Article 91 GDPR to become relevant, the following conditions apply: (i) the controller must be a church, a religious association or a religious community ; (ii) the controller must have adopted and applied, before the entry into force of the GDPR, its own set of data protection rules; and finally (iii) this set of data protection rules must be comprehensive enough and in line with the GDPR (or must otherwise be brought in line with the GDPR).
Churches and religious associations or communities
The controller must fall within a specific category of actors, i.e. “churches and religious associations or communities”. The GDPR does not define these concepts. The EU legislators seems however to have embraced a broad definition of the notion of religion in general. For instance, under Article 10(1)(b) of Directive 2011/95/EU, “[t]he concept of religion shall in particular include the holding of theistic, non-theistic and atheistic beliefs, the participation in, or abstention from, formal worship in private or in public, either alone or in community with others, other religious acts or expressions of view, or forms of personal or communal conduct based on or mandated by any religious belief and as a consequence of religious organisation”.[1]
Based on these specifications, typical examples of religious organisations may include the Roman Catholic Church, and all the catholic associations or communities that belong to it (parishes, monasteries, convents, etc), the Federation of Islamic Organizations in Europe and all the organizations that operate under it (from national associations to local mosques), or the European Jewish Congress and the different communities it brings together (including national coordinating committees and local Jewish communities).
Based on the broad definition given to the concept of religion by the EU legislator, the notion of religious associations could further include smaller religious, philosophical or non-confessional organizations.[2] In the case C-25/17, Jehovan todistajat, for example, the CJEU seems to have recognized the Jehovah's Witnesses community as a religious association, and ruled that the processing of personal data by Jehovah witnesses in the context of their door-to-door preaching activities was subject to EU data protection law.[3] The same could also apply to other minority religious or philosophical groups, such as the Freemasons, the Church of Scientology or Buddhist communities. In practice, however, only well-established organizations which were already allowed, at the national level, to adopt and apply their own set of binding data protection rules are concerned by the derogation prescribed in Article 91 GDPR. This means that only a handful of religious organizations are de facto concerned by Article 91 GDPR, at the exclusion of most minority religious or philosophical groups.
Preexisting data protection rules
If an entity or group qualifies as "church" or as a "religious association or community", the derogation prescribed in Article 91 GDPR may apply, provided that such organization already adopted and applied its own set of binding data protection rules prior to the entry into force of the GDPR (i.e. prior to 25 May 2016).
As a consequence, only a handful of preexisting religious organizations may benefit from the derogation of Article 91 GDPR. Although the logic behind this rule is understandable (i.e. allowing for the continuous separation between state law and, for example, canon law in some member States), it seems to unreasonably restrict the beneficiaries of Article 91 GDPR for the future, and therefore to unduly discriminate between established religious organizations and more recent religious or philosophical movements.
Tosoni argues - and we agree with him - that “Article 91 arguably allows the pre-existing data protection rules of religious organisations to operate as a lex specialis where such organisations process data for strictly religious purposes”.[4]
As far as the Roman Catholic Church is concerned, Italy and Poland are two Member States where Article 91 GDPR is likely to apply, since the Catholic Church did adopt and apply, prior to the entry into force of the GDPR, a specific set of binding data protection rules regulating the processing of personal data for religious purposes. By contrast, in Belgium or France, the Catholic Church did not adopt such rules and is therefore de facto subject to the GDPR.[5]
Rules that are comprehensive and in line with the GDPR
The third and final conditions for the derogation of Article 91 GDPR to apply is that the rules in question must be “comprehensive” and "in line with the GDPR", or must be brought in line with the GDPR. By implication, if it is found that the lex specialis of a religious association do not reach this level of completeness, the GDPR will remain fully applicable.
The GDPR does not provide any clear indications as to the level of similarity which must exist between the GDPR and the lex specialis for the latter to be considered as comprehensive and compatible enough.
Finally, the church or other religious group must update the existing framework and bring into line with the GDPR. The adaptation must be substantial and lead to a basic equivalence in relation to all aspects of the Regulation. There may still be some necessary and minor divergences from the Regulation (ultimately, preserving different beliefs and traditions is the final goal of Article 91). Such discrepancies, however, must be strictly necessary to achieve the ultimate aim of the provision, which is to protect the religious freedom of the persons concerned.
(2) DPA supervision
Religious organisations that fulfill the requirements listed in Paragraph 1 and therefore continue to apply their special rules must be subject to the supervision of an independent supervisory authority. It can either be a new authority or the one responsible for monitoring the application of the GDPR. In any case, all the conditions specified in Chapter VI GDPR must be met.
Decisions
→ You can find all related decisions in Category:Article 91 GDPR
References
- ↑ In this sense Tosoni, who adds how “in principle, the concepts of' churches and religious associations or communities should also be interpreted broadly. For instance, in the Jehovah, Witnesses case, the CJEU seems to (implicitly) recognise that the Jehovas Witnesses community should be considered a religious association or community for the purposes of Article 17 TFEU and the DPD, and the Advocate General's Opinion in the same case suggests that this may be true also under Article 91 GDPR”. See, Tosoni, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 91 GDPR, p. 1263 (Oxford University Press 2020).
- ↑ Tosoni, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 91 GDPR, p. 1263 (Oxford University Press 2020).
- ↑ D'Ath Florence and De Smedt Stéphanie, “Arrêt Jehovan todistajat: clarification du champ d’application matériel de la législation en matière de protection des données et de la notion de responsable conjoint du traitement”, in Journal de Droit Européen, 2019/2, pp. 67-69.
- ↑ Tosoni, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 91 GDPR, p. 1263 (Oxford University Press 2020).
- ↑ See, for example, Communiqués de l'église catholique de Belgique, "Nouvelle loi sur la protection de la vie privée", 25 avril 2018, available at https://www.cathobel.be/2018/04/nouvelle-loi-sur-la-protection-de-la-vie-privee/.
- Artikel 91. Datenschutz in Kirchen und Religionsgemeinschaften: Blog on data protection in religious organizations (in German)
- List of laws and specific supervisory authorities according to Art. 91 GDPR (in German)