Skip to content
DRAFT OPINION (COM(2021)0281 – C90200/2021 – 2021/0136(COD))

On the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council Amending Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 as regards establishing a framework for a European Digital Identity

LIBE-PA-732601

Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs · Rapporteur: Cristian Terheş

Official HTML ↗ PDF DOCX
✦ In shortFull text
✦ In short · AI summary of this text, generated 29 Sept 2026

Written by a language model from the full text only; every figure comes from the text. The paragraph links open the paragraph a statement rests on — check the text itself before relying on it.

This is a draft opinion by the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs on the proposal to amend Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 to establish a framework for a European Digital Identity. The opinion raises concerns about data protection and privacy, including the unclear relation between eIDAS and the General Data Protection Regulation, data minimisation, selective disclosure, privacy by design, unique identifiers, transparency, dependence on big tech companies, and browser security. It proposes amendments to ensure pseudonyms are always an option where full identification is not legally mandated, to restore references to the relationship between eIDAS and European data protection legislation to the 2014 level, and to delete Article 11a on unique identification. The opinion calls for the entire proposal to be sent back to the Commission for a complete redesign.

Committee position. The committee proposes to amend the Commission proposal to address data protection and privacy concerns, including making pseudonyms an option, restoring 2014-level data protection references, deleting Article 11a on unique identification, and adding safeguards on relying parties, proxies, user information, and trust service providers. It calls for the entire proposal to be sent back to the Commission for a complete redesign.

Key points

  1. The draft opinion raises concerns about data protection and privacy aspects of the Commission proposal, as shared by the European Data Protection Supervisor and stakeholders.
  2. It warns that technical options for implementation are to be adopted by the Commission via non-legislative acts, which could be more intrusive at the expense of fundamental rights.
  3. Specific concerns include the unclear relation between eIDAS and the General Data Protection Regulation, data minimisation, selective disclosure, privacy by design, unique identifiers, lack of transparency, dependence on big tech companies, and weakening of browser security.
  4. The rapporteur proposes amendments to make pseudonyms an option in all cases where full identification is not legally mandated and to restore references to the relationship between eIDAS and European data protection legislation to the 2014 level.
  5. It calls for unlinkability and non-traceability to protect user transactions from centralised surveillance.
  6. It proposes deleting Article 11a on unique identification, as a unique persistent identifier would be illegal or unconstitutional in some Member States and is not needed because the existing interoperability framework already entails a unique representation for cross-border cases.
  7. The opinion calls for the entire proposal to be sent back to the Commission for a complete redesign to safeguard fundamental rights.
  8. Amendment 1 adds a definition of the Digital Identity subject and requires safeguards to prevent providers of electronic identification means and electronic attestation of attributes from combining personal data from other services.
  9. Amendment 2 states that using biometrics should not be a precondition for using the European Digital Identity Wallet and that biometric data for uniquely identifying a natural person should not be stored in the cloud.
  10. Amendment 3 requires mechanisms for validation, selective disclosure and authentication to be privacy-preserving, preventing tracking and respecting anonymity and pseudonymity.
  11. Amendments 4 to 16 make changes to definitions, pseudonym use, relying party identification, proxy confidentiality, user information, trust service providers, unique representation, user control, deletion of Article 11a, minimum data set, supervisory body information, complaints, and lawful processing.

Who is affected

  • Users of the European Digital Identity Wallet, who would gain options for pseudonym use and protections against tracking.
  • Providers of electronic identification means and electronic attestation of attributes, who would face restrictions on combining personal data.
  • Relying parties, who would need to be uniquely identified and have information requests limited.
  • Member States, which would be prevented from requiring unique persistent identifiers and from receiving information about wallet use.
  • The Commission, which is asked to redesign the proposal.

Figures and deadlines

  • Regulation (EU) No 910/2014, the regulation being amended.
  • Regulation (EU) 2016/679, the General Data Protection Regulation, referenced for data protection.
  • Directive 95/46/EC, referenced regarding the original eIDAS data protection standard.
  • Article 12(3)(c) of the original eIDAS Regulation, which mandated privacy by design.
  • Article 11a, proposed for deletion.
  • Article 12(4)(d), on the minimum set of person identification data.
  • Article 6b(1), on Member State approval for relying parties.
  • Article 6a(10), on implementing acts for the European Digital Identity Wallets.