-----Original Message----- From: David Logan Sent: 01 June 2001 09:14 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: RE: Re CCTV Footage 2) > The statutory duties relate to (for example) crime and disorder, town centre traffic, and public safety. Although CCTV is not specified in law, it is the chosen methodology in most cases. My problem is though as a creature of statute must a local authority claim specific statutory authority for the use of cctv? To some extent I think there is a solution in that local authorities have power to do anything conducive to or incidental to their other functions. So, for instance, could the local authority, as housing authority, use cctv images to monitor council house estates - even to the extent of looking out for suspicious activity within the estate (e.g. unusual number of visitors to any property; "moonlight flits" from a property)? Could the Council, as licensing authority, use cctv to determine if street traders have applied for and obtained relevant licences? 3) > The purposes stated must be the non-obvious ones This still causes problems in determining the actual amount of detail to be given on the sign, especially where the information may be shared between various depts of the Council. (I could go about data matching but will we leave that until next week?!) 4) > Yes, CCTV images can be sensitive if for example they show a person's disbilities, physical health, mental condition, religion (from their attire) etc., and they can be sensitive if they show an alleged or real offence. This is my concern - so does that mean that data controllers should act as if all cctv images will be sensitive personal data to be on the safe side? David Logan West Dunbartonshire Council. -----Original Message----- From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Sent: 01 June 2001 06:31 To: [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Re CCTV Footage In a message dated 31/05/2001 16:26:05 GMT Daylight Time, [log in to unmask] writes: << The Commissioner's Code doesn't restrict her example to instances where the cctv scheme is for the prevention or detection of crime. Your point, therefore, raises several interesting issues, such as: - to what extent can reliance be placed on the Code if one suspects that the Act places a greater duty than is specified in the Code - to what extent must local authorities have specific statutory authority for the use of cctv - to what extent must signs give specification of the uses of the cctv scheme. For instance, in a sports centre the purposes could be anything from the usual prevention and detection of crime, etc through to the general safety of users of certain facilities where the facilities are left unattended (even through to assisting someone who has dropped some property within the building!) Just as an aside - are cctv images ever likely to be sensitive personal data either by reference to the person's appearance or behaviour on screen? >> ------- 1) I don't think the code describes a lesser requirement than the Act, it's just that the examples given may be misinterpreted. The code itself in the "standards" sections are a reflection of the legal requirements. 2) The statutory duties relate to (for example) crime and disorder, town centre traffic, and public safety. Although CCTV is not specified in law, it is the chosen methodology in most cases. 3) The purposes stated must be the non-obvious ones such as (again, only examples) parking fee enforcement (some owners think the cameras are there to protect their cars), community safety (could cover disorder as well as crime), contract compliance (the statement for this could be included in the public works contract rather than on the sign), etc. In the sports centre, "for your safety" is a shorthand way of describing the purpose you describe. If the person who has dropped something of value is assisted in retrieving it, I doubt they would complain but if he/she dropped litter and was approached about it you would have to show it was a crime or a breach of the rules of attending the facility. 4) Yes, CCTV images can be sensitive if for example they show a person's disbilities, physical health, mental condition, religion (from their attire) etc., and they can be sensitive if they show an alleged or real offence. Ian Buckland MD Keep IT Legal Ltd Please Note: The information contained in this document does not replace or negate the need for proper legal advice and/or representation. It is essential that you do not rely upon any advice given without contacting your solicitor. If you need further explanation of any points raised please contact Keep I.T. Legal Ltd at the address below: 55 Curbar Curve Inkersall, Chesterfield Derbyshire S43 3HP (Reg 3822335) Tel: 01246 473999 Fax: 01246 470742 E-mail: [log in to unmask] Website: www.keepitlegal.co.uk ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 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! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^