I have been taken to task off-list, by somebody who is apparently 'not
allowed to post', over a mistake I made in the previous thread regarding
retention of fingerprints. I apologise to list members for that mistake.
As was quite correctly pointed out, and I had failed to recall or research
adequately, the police are allowed to retain fingerprints indefinitely - see
http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld200304/ldjudgmt/jd040
722/york-1.htm for an overview, legislative support and background.
So Principle 5 is not relevant for fingerprints or DNA.
I am now puzzled why, with the photographic driving licence and the police
links to DVLA, the proposed National ID is being resisted. As it appears the
photographs of all subjects are becoming a mute issue by default, and the
DNA of the majority will be available anyway within a few decades.
I suppose that whole perspective could also fit with the wider publication
of family web pages containing photographs, and which could be argued
indicated a change in the general privacy perspective. That does not seem
to gel fully though.
DPO's within the police will certainly have a lot less to worry about now
the record weeding issues have been laid out so clearly. It should have
been relatively simple to switch the weeding off.
Ian W
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
available to the world wide web community at large at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html
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 : -
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|