I agree that the dissident in question needs protection. However, I might
point out that if the regime in question wants to find their man or woman,
they will not do it solely through an internet search.
First, is the name a registered search field within the planning
application webpage? If a webpage is not configured to allow searching by
name, then a search engine cannot find it. The planning applications can
be searchable by number or some other reference which will not give up the
name, at least not directly. Therefore, the regime in question will need
to trawl through millions of pages on the off chance they may find the
planning application with the name in question.
Second, if the person in question has unusual characteristics, and the
regime in question has a good idea where he or she lives, ie London, they
can quickly begin to narrow the search. For example, they can go to known
associates. Dissidents and refugees from foreign countries usually
associate with their countrymen. A case in point is or was the white
Russian emigres in Paris after the Russian Revolution.
Third, if the person in question needs political protection, I would be
surprised if an exemption could not be made. Common sense allows for such
discretion. However, common sense may be lacking in the law.
Fourth, dissidents and refugees are found by tyrannical regimes, without a
planning application. Take for example the two Chinese dissidents who
were killed in London a few years ago. They were living quite anonymously
in their flat, their neighbours did not know their status, and they were
found and killed. Their murders remain unsolved.
Or take for example the CIA officers who were shot and killed on their
drive into CIA headquarters in the early 1990s. The gunman was a Pashtuni
tribesman seeking revenge for a perceived, or real, betrayal of a relative
by these officers in Pakistan. He found them without a planning
application being submitted nor was the attacker helped by a tyrannical
regime.
Or take for example the former commander of the USS Vincennes, (He gave
the order to shoot down the Iranian Airbus) who without a planning
application, had a bomb planted on his vehicle at a stoplight in San
Diego. He survived the attack. Again, he was found and attacked without
recourse to a planning application. The attackers may have been helped by
the Iranian government, but that has not been proven conclusively.
Or take for example my friend, who moved 2000 miles across the United
States to escape a stalker, altered his name, and ended all contact with
family and friends. He was found, without a planning application. He and
his wife ended up moving to another state and may have even moved back to
his wife's country in a bid to escape. His stalker was not helped by a
tyrannical regime.
Is the dissident in question on the electoral register?
My point is that publicising or making public certain information is not
inherently problematic. Two things need to be considered and
disentangled. First, should the names of objectors be known? I argue that
yes they should be public. Second, should the name and address of the
applicants be made public? I argue that yes they should. However, both
can be made public in limited ways. As I mentioned earlier, the names and
addresses can be attached to a planning application without being a search
field. Therefore, if I am interested in the application, I live nearby, I
can search by address without needing to know the name. This would solve
the problem of the dissident. Unless of course, his address is already
known, and in that case the point is moot. My point concerning the
objectors is that data protection issues become moot if we cannot assure
physical safety. The reference to retail sanity and wholesale madness
comes to mind.
As it is Friday, I wish all who have read this far a pleasant and
enjoyable weekend.
Best
Lawrence Serewicz
Lawrence W. Serewicz
Scrutiny Manager
Management Support Unit
Wear Valley District Council
01388-761-985
[log in to unmask]
Sent by: This list is for those interested in Data Protection issues
<[log in to unmask]>
02/06/2005 20:09
Please respond to KITLegal
To: [log in to unmask]
cc:
Subject: Re: [data-protection] Opinions sought - Planning Applications
In a message dated 02/06/05 15:06:26 GMT Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes (snip):
> I think the risks are small, and the benefits could be large.
-------
Then consider this. I know a man who was granted asylum in this country
and
is still being sought by the regime he ran from. If he wants to extend
his
house, have it adapted for disabled access, or change the use for whatever
reason, he runs a risk of being found if his details are published
worldwide. He
has committed no crime, he was just "on the wrong side". Can he never be
allowed a right to improve his home? He cannot lie on the form about who
he is, he
cannot remain anonymous, he doesn't mind his neighbours knowing about his
application because they know little of his background. How is the
Internet
different from a local planning process? That's how. People running from
violent
marriages, people being stalked, and others should be given a right to get
on
with their lives without the "small risk" as you call it, due to some
ill-conceived operation of convenience.
A local system could still exist using the Internet. Register all
relevant
persons and issue a PIN or other identifier. Using the PIN, the people
who
need to know about planning applications in their area can do so. People
from
outside the area who just want names and addresses for junk mailing,
scamming or
other nefarious purposes, can get nothing. E-government targets are met,
personal data is protected and the right to a private life (Art 8 ECHR) is
maintained.
Ian B
Ian Buckland
Managing Director
Keep IT Legal Ltd
Please Note: The information given above 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
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
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
Any queries about sending or receiving message please send to the list
owner
[log in to unmask]
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
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
Any queries about sending or receiving message please send to the list owner
[log in to unmask]
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
