Reconciling transparency and privacy through the European Digital Identity

Where lies the balance between privacy and transparency? It is an everlasting question, that lied at the heart of the recent judgement of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). The case concerned the Ultimate Beneficial Ownership registry which contains the information of who has a financial interest in companies. The registry was open to the public. The wide accessibility aimed to increase transparency and thereby prevent money laundering and the financing of terrorism (MLFT). The registry was open to public access and the question to the CJEU was whether the accessibility was lawful. The judgement of the CJEU declared the wide accessibility to be unlawful. The judgement acknowledges the importance of the concept of transparency but nevertheless considers the public access to be unproportionate. Leaving the question of how to balance transparency with privacy. The answer can be found in redesigning the European electronic Identity. This case-note will first discuss the facts of the case in section 2. The note will then continue by summarizing the opinion of the Advocate General in section 3. In section 4 the note will summarize the judgement of the CJEU. The case note will end in section 5 with an analysis of the impact of the case in relation to developing a digital European Identity.