The Convention for the protection of individuals with regard to automatic processing of personal data (‘Convention 108 ‘) was opened for signature in Strasbourg on 28 January 1981 and came into force on 1 October 1985 Thirtyfive years aft er its opening for signature, the Convention applies to 50 countries.

Convention 108 is unique It was unique over three decades ago, and remains the only legally binding international instrument in the field of data protection Its legally binding force is a key element that makes it unique, but it is not the only one Another key characteristic of Convention 108 is its unmatched potential for global reach: Convention 108 is open to any country in the world.

Is this opening to the world, aimed at affording protection to individuals when data concerning them flow across borders and oceans, with a particular focus on the trans-Atlantic dimension examined here, the result of genetic instructions which guided its development? Or is it instead the result of a genetic mutation or the result of the use of genetic engineering techniques?

Convention 108 was conceived, and delivered, with the idea that data protection should respect the principle of international free flow of information Its trans-Atlantic nature in fact pre-dated the Convention itself, deriving from the identity of its parents and in the hopes they vested in the Convention.

On the life scale of an international treaty, a few decades of life amounts only to infancy, and the trans-Atlantic hopes that have started to materialise only recently are to be considered in a longer-term perspective, with a promising future.

CONVENTION 108, TRANS-ATLANTIC AT BIRTH

The Committee that draft ed Convention 108 had in its mandate the clear instruction ‘to prepare a Convention for the protection of privacy in relation to data processing abroad and transfrontier data processing’ It ‘was instructed to do so in close collaboration with the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, as well as the non-European member countries of that organisation, having regard to the activities which OECD was carrying out in the field of information, computer and communications policy.’