On February 11, 2010, the European Parliament refused to give its consent to the EU's (European Union) interim agreement on banking data transfers to the USA via the SWIFT network, amid concerns for privacy, proportionality and reciprocity. This move renders the text signed between the US and the 27 EU Member states legally void. The parliament's president, Jerzy Buzek, said the assembly wants more safeguards for civil liberties and believes human rights have been compromised in the name of security. Underscoring the importance of the agreement to the United States, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner had promised to cooperate with the Parliament in negotiating the long-term accord.

This is a typical conflict of European data privacy laws vs.US counter-terrorism laws.

On one hand, the United States Department of the Treasury wants access to financial payment messaging data stored in the territory of the European Union for preventing and combating terrorism and its financing. On the other hand, this access is considered as a departure from European law and practice in how law enforcement agencies would acquire individuals' financial records for law enforcement activities, namely individual court-approved warrants or subpoenas to examine specific transactions instead of relying on broad administrative subpoenas for millions of records.

SWIFT is a member-owned cooperative that provides the communications platform, products and services to connect over 8,600 banking organisations, securities institutions and corporate customers in more than 208 countries. SWIFT is responsible for routing about $6 trillion daily among banks, brokerage houses, stock exchanges and other institutions

As a result, SWIFT is caught in the middle of a conflict between E.U. data privacy laws and US counter-terrorism laws. This may happen to other multi-national companies and may be solved at the national level only.

What are your views around this conflict of laws?