white_paper_on_data_protection_in_india_171127_final_v2

More documents

Recommendations

Info

data protection clauses adopted by the European Commission 330 (d) standard data protection clauses adopted by a supervisory authority and approved by the Commission 331 (e) an approved code of conduct pursuant to Article 40; or (f) an approved certification mechanism pursuant to Article 42 together with binding and enforceable commitments of the controller. At present, the European Commission has deemed Andorra, 332 Argentina, 333 Canada, 334 Switzerland, 335 Faeroe Island, 336 Guernsey, 337 Israel, 338 Isle of Man, 339 Jersey, 340 New Zealand, 341 Uruguay 342 and the US (via the Privacy Shield) to be adequate. 330 Article 93(2), EU GDPR. 331 Article 93(2), EU GDPR. 332 Commission Decision dated 19 October 2010 and notified under document C(2010) 7084, available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32010D0625 (last accessed 30 October 2017); Article 29 Data Protection Working Party, ‗Opinion 7/2009 on the level of protection of personal data in the Principality of Andorra‘, European Commission (1 December 2009), available at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/article-29/documentation/opinionrecommendation/files/2009/wp166_en.pdf (last accessed 30 October 2017). 333 Commission Decision dated 30 June 2003 and notified under document (2003/490/EC), available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1415636698083&uri=CELEX:32003D0490 (last accessed 30 October 2017); Article 29 Data Protection Working Party, ‗Opinion 4/2002 by the Working Party on the level of protection of personal data in Argentina‘, European Commission (3 October 2002), available at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/article-29/documentation/opinionrecommendation/files/2002/wp63_en.pdf (last accessed 30 October 2017). 334 Commission Decision dated 20 December 2001 and notified under document 2002/2/EC, available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32002D0002&qid=1415699250815 (last accessed 17 November 2017); Article 29 Data Protection Working Party, Opinion 2/2001 on the adequacy of the Canadian Personal Information and Electronic Documents Act, European Commission (26 January 2001), available at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/article-29/documentation/opinionrecommendation/files/2001/wp39_en.pdf (last accessed 30 October 2017). 335 Commission Decision dated 26 July 2000 and notified under document C (2000) 2304, available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1415700329280&uri=CELEX:32000D0518 (last accessed 17 November 2017); Working Party on the Protection of Individuals with regard to the Processing of Personal Data, ‗Opinion No. 5/99 on The level of protection of personal data in Switzerland‘, European Commission (7 June 1999), available at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/article-29/documentation/opinionrecommendation/files/1999/wp22_en.pdf (last accessed 17 November 2017). 336 Article 29 Data Protection Working Party, ‗Opinion 9/2007 on the level of protection of personal data in the Faroe Islands‘, European Commission (9 October 2007), available at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/dataprotection/article-29/documentation/opinion-recommendation/files/2007/wp142_en.pdf (last accessed 30 October 2017). 337 Commission Decision dated 21 November 2003, and notified under document number C(2003) 4309, available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1415701941268&uri=CELEX:32003D0821 (last accessed 30 October 2017); Article 29 Data Protection Working Party, ‗Opinion 5/2003 on the level of protection of personal data in Guernsey‘, European Commission (13 June 2003), available at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/article-29/documentation/opinionrecommendation/files/2003/wp79_en.pdf (last accessed 30 October 2017). 338 Commission Decision dated 31 January 2011, and notified under document C(2011) 332, available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1415701992276&uri=CELEX:32011D0061 (last accessed 30 October 2017); Article 29 Data Protection Working Party, ‗Opinion 6/2009 on the level of protection of personal data in Israel‘, European Commission (1 December 2009), available at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/dataprotection/article-29/documentation/opinion-recommendation/files/2009/wp165_en.pdf (last accessed 30 October 2017). 339 Commission Decision dated 28 April 2004, and notified under document C(2004) 1556; available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1415702956426&uri=CELEX:32004D0411 (last accessed 30 October 2017); Article 29 Data Protection Working Party, ‗Opinion 6/2003 on the level of protection of personal data in the Isle of Man‘, European Commission (21 November 2003), available at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/article-29/documentation/opinionrecommendation/files/2003/wp82_en.pdf (last accessed 30 October 2017). 340 Commission Decision dated 8 May 2008, notified under document C(2008)1746, available at: http://eurlex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1415703064772&uri=CELEX:32008D0393 (last accessed 30 October 2017); Article 29 Data Protection Working Party, ‗Opinion 8/2007 on the level of protection of personal 64
(ii) Binding Corporate Rules BCR are internal rules (such as codes of conduct) which are adopted by a multi-national group of companies. BCRs define the global policy of the multi-national group of companies with regard to the international transfers of personal data within the same corporate group, to entities located in countries, which do not provide an adequate level of protection. 343 Multinational companies use BCRs in order to adduce adequate safeguards for the protection of the privacy and fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals within the meaning of Article 47 of the EU GDPR. 344 (iii) Model Contractual Clauses The European Commission has the power to decide that certain standard contractual clauses offer sufficient safeguards with respect to data protection while undertaking transfer of data to non-EU/EEA countries. 345 As of date, the European Commission has issued two sets of standard contractual clauses: one for transfers from data controllers to data controllers established outside the EU/EEA; and one set for the transfer to processors established outside the EU/EEA. 346 Transfers of data made under these contracts are deemed to be protected under the EU GDPR. Since it is often difficult for stakeholders to comply with the ‗adequate level‘ of protection for cross-border data transfers, alternatives such as Model Contract Clauses may play a crucial role in practice. The use of these alternatives should be facilitated for data controllers in any Member State. data in Jersey‘, European Commission (17 November 2007), available at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/dataprotection/article-29/documentation/opinion-recommendation/files/2007/wp141_en.pdf (last accessed 30 October 2017). 341 Commission Decision dated 19 December 2012 on the level of protection of personal data by New Zealand, notified under document C (2012) 9557, available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?qid=1415703506367&uri=CELEX:32013D0065 (last accessed 30 October 2017); Article 29 Data Protection Working Party, ‗Opinion 11/2011 on the level of protection of personal data in New Zealand‘, European Commission (4 April 2011), available at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/article- 29/documentation/opinion-recommendation/files/2011/wp182_en.pdf (last accessed 30 October 2017). 342 Commission Decision dated 21 August 2012, on the level of protection of personal data by the Eastern Republic of Uruguay, notified under document C (2012) 5704, available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?qid=1417090893822&uri=CELEX:32012D0484 (last accessed 30 October 2017); Article 29 Data Protection Working Party, ‗Opinion 6/2010 on the level of protection of personal data in the Eastern Republic of Uruguay‘, European Commission (12 October 2010), available at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/dataprotection/article-29/documentation/opinion-recommendation/files/2010/wp177_en.pdf (last accessed 30 October 2017). 343 European Commission, ‗Overview on Binding Corporate Rules‘, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/dataprotection/international-transfers/binding-corporate-rules/index_en.htm (last accessed 30 October 2017). 344 European Commission, ‗Overview on Binding Corporate Rules‘, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/dataprotection/international-transfers/binding-corporate-rules/index_en.htm (last accessed 30 October 2017). 345 European Commission, ‗Frequently Asked Questions Relating to Transfers of Personal Data From The EU/EEA To Third Countries‘, 11, (2009), available at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/policies/privacy/docs/international_transfers_faq/international_transfers_faq.pdf (last accessed 29 October 2017). 346 European Commission, ‗Model Contracts for the Transfer of Personal Data to Third Countries‘, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/international-transfers/transfer/index_en.htm (last accessed 30 October 2017). 65
Page 1 and 2:
WHITE PAPER OF THE COMMITTEE OF EXP
Page 3 and 4:
inclination to peruse the contents
Page 5 and 6:
TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword.........
Page 7 and 8:
(x) Impact on development of teleco
Page 9 and 10:
9.1 Introduction ..................
Page 11 and 12:
1. A Digital India in a Digital Wor
Page 13 and 14:
information can then be used to cre
Page 15 and 16:
Privacy is a complex concept that h
Page 17 and 18:
The FIPPS were soon followed by the
Page 19 and 20:
In light of these developments, the
Page 21 and 22:
OECD Guidelines, 68 and sought to a
Page 23 and 24: Constitution - the right against un
Page 25 and 26: visits at night and regular surveil
Page 27 and 28: or necessary for legal compliance.
Page 29 and 30: Aadhaar based authentication which
Page 31 and 32: tested as per the contemporary Indi
Page 33 and 34: man and woman must be kept in mind.
Page 35 and 36: of the law. Second, the ease of cro
Page 37 and 38: ambit of the term organisation. 191
Page 39 and 40: 1. What are your views on what the
Page 41 and 42: 2.2 Horizontality of Application (P
Page 43 and 44: a. The law could regulate personal
Page 45 and 46: This distinction between data and i
Page 47 and 48: (iv) Pseudonymisation and Anonymisa
Page 49 and 50: that the information is not in the
Page 51 and 52: CHAPTER 4: SENSITIVE PERSONAL DATA
Page 53 and 54: protection. Subject to an evaluatio
Page 55 and 56: South Africa The POPI Act defines p
Page 57 and 58: a. All personal data processed must
Page 59 and 60: an employee of the controller who g
Page 61 and 62: . Clear bifurcation of roles and as
Page 63 and 64: 7.2 Specific Exemptions and Interna
Page 65 and 66: In India, collection of statistical
Page 67 and 68: of imposition of similar nature.‘
Page 69 and 70: mechanism to provide prior approval
Page 71 and 72: 1. What are your views on including
Page 73: To facilitate the cross-border tran
Page 77 and 78: individual to take action to enforc
Page 79 and 80: CHAPTER 9 : DATA LOCALISATION 9.1 I
Page 81 and 82: (iii) IT-BPO/BPM Industrial Growth
Page 83 and 84: amounts of computer hardware, they
Page 85 and 86: In Indonesia, the regulation regard
Page 87 and 88: Distribution of Insurance Products)
Page 89 and 90: Another advantage of relying on con
Page 91 and 92: individuals may find it impossible
Page 93 and 94: that the collection is reasonably n
Page 95 and 96: CHAPTER 2: CHILD’S CONSENT 2.1 In
Page 97 and 98: the cloud service provider as to st
Page 99 and 100: The PIPEDA does not specifically de
Page 101 and 102: 7. How can the requirement for pare
Page 103 and 104: mechanism still continues to play a
Page 105 and 106: 3.3 International Practices Despite
Page 107 and 108: (CALOPPA) 466 and the GLB Act requi
Page 109 and 110: CHAPTER 4: OTHER GROUNDS OF PROCESS
Page 111 and 112: This ground covers two types of sce
Page 113 and 114: that there may be certain situation
Page 115 and 116: CHAPTER 5: PURPOSE SPECIFICATION AN
Page 117 and 118: collected for more than one purpose
Page 119 and 120: enable data controllers to understa
Page 121 and 122: CHAPTER 6: PROCESSING OF SENSITIVE
Page 123 and 124: may instrumentally be caused if the
Page 125 and 126:
PIPEDA does not specifically deal w
Page 127 and 128:
CHAPTER 7: STORAGE LIMITATION AND D
Page 129 and 130:
solely for archiving purposes in th
Page 131 and 132:
2. Data Quality: The principle of d
Page 133 and 134:
data protection laws across jurisdi
Page 135 and 136:
The requirement to be provided the
Page 137 and 138:
Information Act, 1982 or other appr
Page 139 and 140:
CHAPTER 9: INDIVIDUAL PARTICIPATION
Page 141 and 142:
. the processing is unlawful and th
Page 143 and 144:
such a right may be unsuitable in t
Page 145 and 146:
from being taken solely on the basi
Page 147 and 148:
CHAPTER 10: INDIVIDUAL PARTICIPATIO
Page 149 and 150:
emove data for ―the processing of
Page 151 and 152:
South Africa Section 24 of the POPI
Page 153 and 154:
PART IV REGULATION AND ENFORCEMENT
Page 155 and 156:
they form core, substantive element
Page 157 and 158:
CHAPTER 2: ACCOUNTABILITY AND ENFOR
Page 159 and 160:
have been taken or that the data su
Page 161 and 162:
The EU GDPR focuses on a ―risk ba
Page 163 and 164:
person who processes personal infor
Page 165 and 166:
with developing certain baseline ac
Page 167 and 168:
ENFORCEMENT TOOLS 2.6 Introduction
Page 169 and 170:
Australia The Privacy Act makes ext
Page 171 and 172:
B. PERSONAL DATA BREACH NOTIFICATIO
Page 173 and 174:
eputation, and loss of confidential
Page 175 and 176:
There is a need to put in place a n
Page 177 and 178:
C. CATEGORISATION OF DATA CONTROLLE
Page 179 and 180:
The Treasury Board of Canada Secret
Page 181 and 182:
Under the EU GDPR, only certain dat
Page 183 and 184:
5. What range of additional obligat
Page 185 and 186:
D. DATA PROTECTION AUTHORITY 2.18 I
Page 187 and 188:
and approval of the appointment by
Page 189 and 190:
The supervisory authority shall pro
Page 191 and 192:
. Advisory The functions of the OAI
Page 193 and 194:
standards be set by different entit
Page 195 and 196:
maintain reasonable security practi
Page 197 and 198:
notices‘ 827 and ‗information n
Page 199 and 200:
5. Given that the Appellate Tribuna
Page 201 and 202:
CHAPTER 4: REMEDIES A. PENALTIES In
Page 203 and 204:
sector, size, financial and other r
Page 205 and 206:
to an overly adverse impact on smal
Page 207 and 208:
B. COMPENSATION Awarding of compens
Page 209 and 210:
United Kingdom As per the guidance
Page 211 and 212:
C. OFFENCES There are certain types
Page 213 and 214:
4.11 Provisional Views 1. The law m
Page 215 and 216:
SCOPE AND EXEMPTIONS 1. Territorial
Page 217 and 218:
6. Are there any other views relati
Page 219 and 220:
2. Should the definition of process
Page 221 and 222:
1. What are your views on including
Page 223 and 224:
9. Data Localisation Data localisat
Page 225 and 226:
2. Child’s Consent It is estimate
Page 227 and 228:
Alternatives: a. Assigning a ‗dat
Page 229 and 230:
If ‗sensitive personal data‘ is
Page 231 and 232:
2. Should there be a restriction on
Page 233 and 234:
3. Does a right to be forgotten add
Page 235 and 236:
1. What are your views on the use o
Page 237 and 238:
oth for principled and practical re
Page 239 and 240:
Questions 1. What are your views on
Page 241 and 242:
12. In cases where compensation cla
Page 243:
3. What are the mitigating circumst
show all

white_paper_on_data_protection_in_india_171127_final_v2

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?