white_paper_on_data_protection_in_india_171127_final_v2
(iv) Privacy Shield There are two Privacy Shield frameworks: (i) the EU-US Privacy Shield Framework, which is deemed adequate by the European Commission to enable data transfers between the EU and the US; and (ii) the Swiss-US Privacy Shield Framework, which is deemed adequate by the EU to enable data transfers between Switzerland and the US. In order to join either framework, US organisations wishing to engage in data transfers must self-certify their adequacy to the Department of Commerce and publicly commit to the framework requirements. 347 South Africa In South Africa, the POPI Act provides that a ‗responsible party‘ in South Africa cannot transfer personal information about a data subject to a third party in a foreign country, unless the recipient is subject to a law, binding corporate rules or any other binding agreement which provides substantially similar conditions for lawful processing of personal information relating to a data subject. A ‗responsible party‘ can also transfer personal information about a data subject to a third party in a foreign country if the following conditions are met: (i) if the data subject consents to such a transfer; (ii) if the transfer is necessary for the performance of a contract; (iii) if the transfer is for the benefit of the data subject and it is not practicable to obtain the consent of the data subject for that transfer. 348 Australia In Australia, the Privacy Act provides that where an entity discloses personal information about an individual to an overseas recipient, then the APPs will apply. An entity could mean an agency or an organisation (it is another term for data controller). APP 8 applies to the cross-border disclosure of personal information. 349 This principle provides that before an APP entity discloses personal information about an individual to a person (the overseas recipient), who is not located in Australia or if it discloses to someone who is not the data subject, the entity must take such steps as are reasonable in the circumstances to ensure that the overseas recipient does not breach the APPs. 350 As an exception to this, APP entities are permitted to disclose personal information to the overseas recipient if: (i) the entity reasonably believes that the recipient is subject to a law, or binding scheme which has the overall effect of protecting the information in a way which is substantially similar to the way in which the APPs protect the information; and (ii) that there are mechanisms in place which allow the 347 US Department of Commerce, ‗Fact-Sheet: Overview of EU-US Privacy Shield Framework‘ (12 July 2016), available at: https://www.commerce.gov/sites/commerce.gov/files/media/files/2016/fact_sheet-_euus_privacy_shield_7-16_sc_cmts.pdf, (last accessed 30 October 2017). 348 Section 72, POPI Act. 349 APP 8, Privacy Act. 350 OAIC, ‗Chapter 8: APP 8 — Cross-border disclosure of personal information‘ (March 2015), available at: https://www.oaic.gov.au/agencies-and-organisations/app-guidelines/chapter-8-app-8-cross-border-disclosure-ofpersonal-information, (last accessed 29 October 2017). 66
individual to take action to enforce the law or that binding scheme. 351 Additionally, an entity is allowed to disclose personal information to an overseas recipient if she consents to such disclosure, or if such disclosure is pursuant to an order of a court. Disclosure to overseas recipients is also allowed if the entity reasonably believes that the disclosure of the information is reasonably necessary for the enforcement related activities conducted by an enforcement body. 352 Canada In Canada, PIPEDA does not prohibit the outsourcing of personal information to another jurisdiction, whether by the private sector or a federal institution. 353 Canada follows an organisation-to-organisation approach while dealing with the cross-border transfer of information. Under the PIPEDA, organisations are held accountable for the protection of personal information transfers under each individual outsourcing arrangement or contract. 354 The Privacy Commissioner investigates complaints and investigates the personal information handling practices of organisations. 355 Principle 1 Schedule 1 of PIPEDA addresses the balance between the protection of personal information of individuals and the business necessity of transferring personal information for various reasons, including the availability of service providers, efficiency and economy. 356 It places responsibility on an organization for protecting personal information under its control. Schedule 1 also provides that personal information may be transferred to third parties for processing, and requires organisations to use contractual or other means to ―provide a comparable level of protection while the information is being processed by the third party.‖ Under the Canadian Model, no additional consent needs to be sought 357 for the cross-border transfer of personal information collected as long as the following conditions are met: (i) the information is being used for the purpose it was originally collected and to which the subject already consented; (ii) the entity transferring the information ensures that a comparable level of protection of the personal information is provided by the receiving entity; and (iii) the 351 OAIC, Chapter 6: APP 6 — Use or disclosure of personal information (February 2014), available at: https://www.oaic.gov.au/agencies-and-organisations/app-guidelines/chapter-6-app-6-use-or-disclosure-ofpersonal-information, (last accessed 30 October 2017). 352 APP 8, Privacy Act. 353 Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, ‗Personal Information Transferred Across Borders‘ (1 November 2016), available at: https://www.priv.gc.ca/en/privacy-topics/personal-information-transferredacross-borders/, (last accessed 30 October 2017). 354 Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, ‗Personal Information Transferred Across Borders‘ (1 November 2016), available at: https://www.priv.gc.ca/en/privacy-topics/personal-information-transferredacross-borders/, (last accessed 30 October 2017). 355 Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, ‗Personal Information Transferred Across Borders‘ (1 November 2016), available at: https://www.priv.gc.ca/en/privacy-topics/personal-information-transferredacross-borders/, (last accessed 30 October 2017). 356 Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, ‗Personal Information Transferred Across Borders‘ (1 November 2016), available at: https://www.priv.gc.ca/en/privacy-topics/personal-information-transferredacross-borders/, (last accessed 30 October 2017). 357 Norton Rose Fulbright, ‗Global Data Privacy Directory‘ (July 2014), 97, available at: http://www.nortonrosefulbright.com/files/global-data-privacy-directory-52687.pdf, (last accessed 30 October 2017). 67
- 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 and 74: To facilitate the cross-border tran
- Page 75: (ii) Binding Corporate Rules BCR ar
- 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
(iv) Privacy Shield<br />
There are two Privacy Shield frameworks: (i) the EU-US Privacy Shield Framework, which is<br />
deemed adequate by the European Commissi<strong>on</strong> to enable <strong>data</strong> transfers between the EU and<br />
the US; and (ii) the Swiss-US Privacy Shield Framework, which is deemed adequate by the<br />
EU to enable <strong>data</strong> transfers between Switzerland and the US. In order to jo<strong>in</strong> either<br />
framework, US organisati<strong>on</strong>s wish<strong>in</strong>g to engage <strong>in</strong> <strong>data</strong> transfers must self-certify their<br />
adequacy to the Department of Commerce and publicly commit to the framework<br />
requirements. 347<br />
South Africa<br />
In South Africa, the POPI Act provides that a ‗resp<strong>on</strong>sible party‘ <strong>in</strong> South Africa cannot<br />
transfer pers<strong>on</strong>al <strong>in</strong>formati<strong>on</strong> about a <strong>data</strong> subject to a third party <strong>in</strong> a foreign country, unless<br />
the recipient is subject to a law, b<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g corporate rules or any other b<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g agreement which<br />
provides substantially similar c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s for lawful process<strong>in</strong>g of pers<strong>on</strong>al <strong>in</strong>formati<strong>on</strong><br />
relat<strong>in</strong>g to a <strong>data</strong> subject. A ‗resp<strong>on</strong>sible party‘ can also transfer pers<strong>on</strong>al <strong>in</strong>formati<strong>on</strong> about a<br />
<strong>data</strong> subject to a third party <strong>in</strong> a foreign country if the follow<strong>in</strong>g c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s are met: (i) if the<br />
<strong>data</strong> subject c<strong>on</strong>sents to such a transfer; (ii) if the transfer is necessary for the performance of<br />
a c<strong>on</strong>tract; (iii) if the transfer is for the benefit of the <strong>data</strong> subject and it is not practicable to<br />
obta<strong>in</strong> the c<strong>on</strong>sent of the <strong>data</strong> subject for that transfer. 348<br />
Australia<br />
In Australia, the Privacy Act provides that where an entity discloses pers<strong>on</strong>al <strong>in</strong>formati<strong>on</strong><br />
about an <strong>in</strong>dividual to an overseas recipient, then the APPs will apply. An entity could mean<br />
an agency or an organisati<strong>on</strong> (it is another term for <strong>data</strong> c<strong>on</strong>troller). APP 8 applies to the<br />
cross-border disclosure of pers<strong>on</strong>al <strong>in</strong>formati<strong>on</strong>. 349 This pr<strong>in</strong>ciple provides that before an APP<br />
entity discloses pers<strong>on</strong>al <strong>in</strong>formati<strong>on</strong> about an <strong>in</strong>dividual to a pers<strong>on</strong> (the overseas recipient),<br />
who is not located <strong>in</strong> Australia or if it discloses to some<strong>on</strong>e who is not the <strong>data</strong> subject, the<br />
entity must take such steps as are reas<strong>on</strong>able <strong>in</strong> the circumstances to ensure that the overseas<br />
recipient does not breach the APPs. 350 As an excepti<strong>on</strong> to this, APP entities are permitted to<br />
disclose pers<strong>on</strong>al <strong>in</strong>formati<strong>on</strong> to the overseas recipient if: (i) the entity reas<strong>on</strong>ably believes<br />
that the recipient is subject to a law, or b<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g scheme which has the overall effect of<br />
protect<strong>in</strong>g the <strong>in</strong>formati<strong>on</strong> <strong>in</strong> a way which is substantially similar to the way <strong>in</strong> which the<br />
APPs protect the <strong>in</strong>formati<strong>on</strong>; and (ii) that there are mechanisms <strong>in</strong> place which allow the<br />
347 US Department of Commerce, ‗Fact-Sheet: Overview of EU-US Privacy Shield Framework‘ (12 July 2016),<br />
available<br />
at: https://www.commerce.gov/sites/commerce.gov/files/media/files/2016/fact_sheet-_euus_privacy_shield_7-16_sc_cmts.pdf,<br />
(last accessed 30 October 2017).<br />
348 Secti<strong>on</strong> 72, POPI Act.<br />
349 APP 8, Privacy Act.<br />
350 OAIC, ‗Chapter 8: APP 8 — Cross-border disclosure of pers<strong>on</strong>al <strong>in</strong>formati<strong>on</strong>‘ (March 2015), available at:<br />
https://www.oaic.gov.au/agencies-and-organisati<strong>on</strong>s/app-guidel<strong>in</strong>es/chapter-8-app-8-cross-border-disclosure-ofpers<strong>on</strong>al-<strong>in</strong>formati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
(last accessed 29 October 2017).<br />
66