Jesus Christ has 'moved outside the scope of the Data Protection Act'
or has he...
-----Original Message-----
From: Tommy Kennedy [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 21 December 2001 09:27
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: subject access - (employee) third party rights
Maurice
thanks,
that was quite helpful.
I'm still struggling a bit to justify disclosure where the 3 statutory
instruments quoted don't apply.
Because the unaltered section 7 doesn't include the "relevant person" bit.
But hopefully this won't happen too often, and we'll just need to consider
any instance on its own merits.
thanks again to all who wrote.
Merry Christmas !
(oops, can I say Christmas, because that refers to Christ, and I don't have
permission to disclose His name !!)
;-)
Tommy Kennedy.
>>> Maurice Frankel <[log in to unmask]> 12/20/01 02:51pm >>>
At 1:55 pm +0000 20/12/01, Tommy Kennedy wrote:
>
>It seems to be down to interpretation of 7(4), 7(5) and 7(6).
>
>Disclosure is fairly straightforward for front office staff who have
>been involved with the data subject. Or others who have been named
>in previous correspondence, etc.... etc...
>But I'm still not sure that it is "reasonable in all the
>circumstances" to disclose the name of a back office employee who
>has had no previous contact with the data subject. Particularly
>where they play a supporting role and are never likely to be in
>contact with the data subject, and they have refused consent for the
>disclosure.
To take the suggested divide between front office/back office staff,
what if the back office people who have had no direct contact with
the data subject are decision-makers/influencers who are too high up
in the line of command to deal with him or her directly?
In general, I wonder what the privacy interest is in withholding the
name of someone who works for a public authority, and who is
mentioned in the DS's file in course of carrying out his or duties
in relation to the DS? (Of course, things are different where there
is a risk of violence etc).
A benchmark might be the provisions in the Subject Access
modification orders for social work, education and health, which
prevent the identities of staff/health professionals being withheld
from the DS under section 7 of the DPA.
[see the references to 'relevant person' in
The Data Protection (Subject Access Modification) (Social Work) Order 2000
The Data Protection (Subject Access Modification) (Health) Order 2000
The Data Protection (Subject Access Modification) (Education) Order 2000]
Maurice Frankel
Campaign for Freedom of Information
staff members' privacy interests are actually affected by identifying
them to the DS?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
If you wish to leave this list please send the command
leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
All user commands can be found at : -
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/user-manual/summary-user-commands.htm
all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
If you wish to leave this list please send the command
leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
All user commands can be found at : -
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/user-manual/summary-user-commands.htm
all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
If you wish to leave this list please send the command
leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
All user commands can be found at : -
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/user-manual/summary-user-commands.htm
all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|