atans1

Welcome to S’pore: Mall BSing on data protection law

In Uncategorized on 03/03/2019 at 6:35 am

(Part of an occasional series on uniquely S’porean behaviour, attitudes, customs etc)

The TOC article reported in Welcome to S’pore: Punish public-spirited S’porean is priority, got this considered FB response from a lawyer:

The article says that the management of the mall issued a statement that said, “We have mentioned that firms actions will be taken with regards to the video leak. To further clarify, the point of issue is on the filming of the CCTV footage, which is a breach of PDPA rules and regulations as well as security protocol.“

The statement seems a little confused. If the issue is on the “filming of the CCTV footage” (the collection of personal data) then the fact that there could have been signs informing the public of the existence of CCTV cameras capturing footage and hence personal data would be sufficient notice if the signs informed of the collection and the purposes of collection and the channels of disclosure of the personal data collected. In any event as the place was a public space, the collection of personal data in a public space – in this case the filming – could have been done without consent because the data was in this case “publicly available”. However the guidelines do encourage the good practice of putting up signs that inform that CCTV cameras are in use and the purposes for such collection of personal data.

On the other point of the “leak” (disclosure of the relevant personal data) and who is responsible rather depends on whether the leak was occasioned by an employee of the mall or an external service provider. If it was an employee, then the mall would still be the organisation responsible and the enquiry would revolve around whether the mall had taken all reasonable action to prevent such disclosure. If it was by an external service provider like a security company who was engaged by the mall, then the security company would be the subject of the Commission’s enquiry.

But ultimately someone was hurt. For the statement issued by the mall to centre on a possible PDPA breach rather than on what they would do to take care of a fellow human being is, in my opinion, inappropriate.

(Samuel Seow via TOC)

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: