Given the different approaches to data protection in third countries, the adequacy assessment should be carried out, and any decision based on Article 25(6) of Directive 95/46/EC should be made and enforced in a way that does not arbitrarily or unjustifiably discriminate against or between third countries where like conditions prevail, nor constitute a disguised barrier to trade, regard being had to the European Union’s present international commitments.

The State of Israel should therefore be regarded as providing an adequate level of protection for personal data as referred to in Directive 95/46/EC with regard to automated international transfers of personal data from the European Union to the State of Israel or, where those transfers are not automated, they are subject to further automated processing in the State of Israel. Conversely, international transfers of personal data from the EU to the State of Israel whereby the transfer itself as well as the subsequent data processing is carried out exclusively through non-automated means should not be covered by this Decision.

The Working Party on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data established under Article 29 of Directive 95/46/EC has delivered a favourable opinion on the level of adequacy as regards protection of personal data in relation to automated international transfers of personal data from the European Union or, whether they are non-automated they are subject to further automated processing in the State of Israel. In its favourable opinion, the Working Party has encouraged the Israeli authorities to adopt further provisions which extend the application of Israeli legislation to manual databases, which expressly recognise the application of the proportionality principle to personal data processing in the private sector and which interpret the exemptions in international data transfers as in accordance with the criteria set out in its ‘Working document on a common interpretation of Article 26(1) of Directive 95/46/EC’ (2). This opinion has been taken into account in the preparation of this Decision (3).