Good morning listers!
Welcome to data protection bill/policy discussions. Last week, we went through the principles of data protection and rights of data subjects. We covered the right to privacy in its different forms including the right to be forgotten and consent.
Today, we shift gears a bit and consider the issue of data protection from the point of the processor and controller. The bill defines a controller as one who designs data processing and the processor as one who collects, stores, retrieves , discloses, erases etc on behalf of a controller.
General obligations for controllers and processors are listed in part IV and they include upholding the principles of data protection, protecting the rights of the data subject, duty to notify the subject about processing and breaches, acquisition of consent and security safeguards as regards personal data. It would be interesting to hear from data controllers and processors, views on:
- restrictions on processing personal data (clause 30) where processors may not process data objected by the data subject or which has legal claims.What are the practical implications of restrictions? For example, if one company or government agency received a large number of objections in one period?
- the protection of data subjects from profiling (clause 31). While we have seen negative effects of profiling during the political season, are there positives of profiling that could benefit the data subject and does this bill adequately balance both ends?
- the bill makes it mandatory to notify data subjects in case of breach. How will this change sectors such as banking where issues of data breaches are never discussed with customers or the public in order to protect the confidence of the industry?
- Finally, on the issue of sensitive personal data, which is subject to higher protection. Sensitive personal data includes person’s race, health status, ethnic social origin, political opinion, belief, personal preferences, location, genetic data, biometrics, sex life or sexual orientation. What are the practical implications for existing data sets held by for instance the registrar of persons, universities, schools, insurance companies etc? Is the list proposed by the bill exhaustive? The Senate bill for example defines categories such as trade union membership as sensitive data.
Welcome to the discussion. Please point out any issues in the bill that are either very good and should be retained or problematic and should be improved. Tujadiliane.
--
Grace Mutung'u
Skype: gracebomu
@Bomu
PGP ID : 0x33A3450F