Glad this topic is preoccupying someone else, too.
From a policy point of view, I believe we could limit searches of, say,
email accounts to the live system unless a specific request is made for an
archive search. Administratively, this would be preferable because the
whole tape/cd has to be restored & this would be prohibitively costly on any
frequent basis.
This then obviously begs the question of how any requester is supposed to
know what information is held in the live system and what will be in an
archive. It may of course, be obvious from the nature of the request and
can be complied with readily. As a general principle, if live data is
supplied as standard, the subject could be sent information at that stage on
how to apply further for archive data.
The onus can't be on the subject to identify live/archive data, there has to
be a proactive element from the organisation to assist them - although when
it is introduced or in what detail will be up to each organisation (not all
of whom will be subject to FOI).
Su
-----Original Message-----
From: Ian Welton [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2001 11:52 AM
To:
Subject: Subject Access to archived data
With the first transitional period shortly coming to an end and with all
organisations potentially receiving subject access requests to digitally
archived data I was wondering what mechanisms, e.g. methods of identifying
if a search of a digital archive is necessary, others might have
considered/adopted.
My current thoughts are that the request from the data subject could alert
me to the need to search an archive, but, where the data subject has not got
the necessary information (time parameters and archiving methodology) to
recognise that the data would be within an archive how will we identify the
necessity to search?
Could it be claimed that the necessary information to find the data had not
been provided by the data subject?
Would such a claim be fair to a data subject when the necessary information
about the existence of the data within an archive might easily be available
within the organisation the request is made to?
Will it be necessary to provide to data subjects details of
retention/archiving policies regarding the type of information they may be
requesting, or will it be up to the data subject to obtain that information
via a freedom of information request. (when that eventually applies)?
Ian W
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
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!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
======================================================================
This email is confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please notify us immediately by telephoning +44 (20) 7330 3000 and requesting the IT Helpdesk. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose its contents to any other person.
Allen & Overy
One New Change
London
EC4M 9QQ
Tel:+44 (20) 7330 3000
Fax: +44 (20) 7330 9999
General Email: [log in to unmask]
www: http://www.allenovery.com
Allen & Overy is a solicitors' partnership. A list of the names of partners and their professional qualifications is open to inspection at the above office. The partners are either solicitors or registered foreign lawyers.
======================================================================
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
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!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|