white_paper_on_data_protection_in_india_171127_final_v2
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Alternatives:<br />
a. Assign<strong>in</strong>g a ‗<strong>data</strong> trust score‘.<br />
b. Provid<strong>in</strong>g limited safe harbour from enforcement if certa<strong>in</strong> c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s are met.<br />
If a ‗<strong>data</strong> trust score‘ is assigned, then who should be the body resp<strong>on</strong>sible for provid<strong>in</strong>g<br />
the score?<br />
6. Would a c<strong>on</strong>sent dashboard be a feasible soluti<strong>on</strong> <strong>in</strong> order to allow <strong>in</strong>dividuals to easily<br />
gauge which <strong>data</strong> c<strong>on</strong>trollers have obta<strong>in</strong>ed their c<strong>on</strong>sent and where their pers<strong>on</strong>al <strong>data</strong><br />
resides? Who would regulate the c<strong>on</strong>sent dashboard? Would it be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed by a third<br />
party, or by a government entity?<br />
7. Are there any other alternatives for mak<strong>in</strong>g notice more effective, other than the <strong>on</strong>es<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sidered above?<br />
4. Other Grounds of Process<strong>in</strong>g<br />
It is widely recognised that c<strong>on</strong>sent may not be sufficient as the <strong>on</strong>ly ground for lawful<br />
process<strong>in</strong>g of pers<strong>on</strong>al <strong>data</strong>. Several other grounds, broadly c<strong>on</strong>form<strong>in</strong>g to practical<br />
requirements and legitimate state aims, are <strong>in</strong>corporated <strong>in</strong> various jurisdicti<strong>on</strong>s. The nature<br />
and remit of such grounds requires determ<strong>in</strong>ati<strong>on</strong> <strong>in</strong> the Indian c<strong>on</strong>text.<br />
For a fuller discussi<strong>on</strong>, see page 99 above.<br />
Questi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
1. What are your views <strong>on</strong> <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g other grounds under which process<strong>in</strong>g may be d<strong>on</strong>e?<br />
2. What grounds of process<strong>in</strong>g are necessary other than c<strong>on</strong>sent?<br />
3. Should the <strong>data</strong> protecti<strong>on</strong> authority determ<strong>in</strong>e residuary grounds of collecti<strong>on</strong> and their<br />
lawfulness <strong>on</strong> a case-by-case basis? On what basis shall such determ<strong>in</strong>ati<strong>on</strong> take place?<br />
Alternatives:<br />
a. No residuary grounds need to be provided.<br />
b. The <strong>data</strong> protecti<strong>on</strong> authority should lay down ‗lawful purposes‘ by means of a<br />
notificati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
c. On a case-by-case basis, applicati<strong>on</strong>s may be made to the <strong>data</strong> protecti<strong>on</strong><br />
authority for determ<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g lawfulness.<br />
d. Determ<strong>in</strong>ati<strong>on</strong> of lawfulness may be d<strong>on</strong>e by the <strong>data</strong> c<strong>on</strong>troller subject to certa<strong>in</strong><br />
safeguards <strong>in</strong> the law.<br />
217