scholarly journals DATA PROTECTION AND THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY IN THE COMPUTER AGE – THROUGH LAW ENFORCEMENT OR THROUGH EDUCATION?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrej Cvetkovski
Author(s):  
Agnese Reine-Vītiņa

Mūsdienās tiesības uz privāto dzīvi nepieciešamas ikvienā demokrātiskā sabiedrībā, un šo tiesību iekļaušana konstitūcijā juridiski garantē fiziskas personas rīcības brīvību un vienlaikus arī citu – valsts pamatlikumā noteikto – cilvēka tiesību īstenošanu [5]. Personas datu aizsardzības institūts tika izveidots, izpratnes par tiesību uz personas privātās dzīves neaizskaramību saturu paplašinot 20. gadsimta 70. gados, kad vairāku Eiropas valstu valdības uzsāka informācijas apstrādes projektus, piemēram, tautas skaitīšanu u. c. Informācijas tehnoloģiju attīstība ļāva arvien vairāk informācijas par personām glabāt un apstrādāt elektroniski. Viena no tiesību problēmām bija informācijas vākšana par fizisku personu un tiesību uz privātās dzīves neaizskaramību ievērošana. Lai nodrošinātu privātās dzīves aizsardzību, atsevišķas Eiropas valstis pēc savas iniciatīvas pieņēma likumus par datu aizsardzību. Pirmie likumi par personas datu aizsardzību Eiropā tika pieņemti Vācijas Federatīvajā Republikā, tad Zviedrijā (1973), Norvēģijā (1978) un citur [8, 10]. Ne visas valstis pieņēma likumus par datu aizsardzību vienlaikus, tāpēc Eiropas Padome nolēma izstrādāt konvenciju, lai unificētu datu aizsardzības noteikumus un principus. Nowadays, the right to privacy is indispensable in every democratic society and inclusion of such rights in the constitution, guarantees legally freedom of action of a natural person and, simultaneously, implementation of other human rights established in the fundamental law of the state. The institute of personal data protection was established by expanding the understanding of the content of the right to privacy in the 70’s of the 19th century, when the government of several European countries initiated information processing projects, such as population census etc. For the development of information technology, more and more information on persons was kept and processed in electronic form. One of the legal problems was gathering of information on natural persons and the right to privacy. In order to ensure the protection of privacy, separate European countries, on their own initiative, established a law on data protection. The first laws on the protection of personal data in Europe were established in the Federal Republic of Germany, then in Sweden (1973), Norway (1978) and elsewhere. Not all countries adopted laws on data protection at the same time, so the Council of Europe decided to elaborate a convention to unify data protection rules and principles.


Author(s):  
Araz Poladov

Purpose of research: define the general characteristics of the protection of personal data; analysis of legislation and case law.Methods of research: analysis and study of regulatory documents containing provisions on protection of personal data.Results: normative and practical importance of personal data protection provisions in various legal acts has been underscored.The right to privacy strengthened its position in the United States in the late 19th century and is now recognized by most States.Although the right to privacy in the United States was originally a British political legacy, judicial decisions in England were more conservativeand cautious than those of U.S. courts. One of the important features of this law in the Anglo-Saxon legal system is that itwas previously formed by judicial precedents and legal doctrine. Also, the right to privacy was not among the rights provided for in theBill of Rights. In general, there is an industry-wide approach to data privacy in the United States. There is no specific federal law thatwould guarantee the confidentiality and protection of personal data. Instead, legislation at the federal level is dispersed and aims to protectdata in certain sectors. Judicial practice and court decisions taken at different times play an important role in regulating personaldata protection in the United States. It is also worth mentioning that until the 1970s, decisions of the U.S. courts did not provide thenecessary privacy protection safeguards.Discussion: offering a comprehensive and detailed study and use of this practice in other states.


2019 ◽  
pp. 245-259
Author(s):  
Bernard Łukanko

The study is concerned with the issue of mutual relationship between the failure to comply with the laws on personal data protection and regulations relating to the protection of personal interests, including in particular the right to privacy. The article presents the views held by the Supreme Court with respect to the possibility of considering acts infringing upon the provisions of the Personal Data Protection Act of 1997 (after 24 May 2018) and of the General Data Protection Regulation (after 25 May 2018) as violation of personal interests, such as the right to privacy. The author shared the view of the case law stating that, if in specifc circumstances the processing of personal data violates the right to privacy, the party concerned may seek remedy on the grounds of Articles 23 and 24 of the Polish Civil Code. This position isalso relevant after the entry into force of the GDPR which, in a comprehensive and exhaustive manner, directly applicable in all Member States, regulates the issue of liability under civil law for infringements of the provisions of the Regulation, however, according to the position expressed in professional literature, it does not exclude the concurrence of claims and violation of the provisions on the protection of personal interests caused by a specifc event. In case of improper processing of personal data, the remedies available under domestic law on the protection of personal interests may be of particular importance outside the subject matter scope of the GDPR applicability. 


2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (05) ◽  
pp. 722-733 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valentin M. Pfisterer

AbstractIn recent years, the CJEU has impressively brought to bear the protection of the fundamental rights to privacy and protection of personal data as contained in the CFREU. The Court’s decisions in the Digital Rights, Schrems, Tele2, and PNR cases have reshaped the political and legal landscape in Europe and beyond. By restricting the powers of the governments of EU Member States and annulling legislative acts enacted by the EU legislator, the decisions had, and continue to have, effects well beyond the respective individual cases. Despite their strong impact on privacy and data protection across Europe, however, these landmark decisions reveal a number of flaws and inconsistencies in the conceptualization of the rights to privacy and protection of personal data as endorsed and interpreted by the CJEU. This Article identifies and discusses some of the shortcomings revealed in the recent CJEU privacy and data protection landmark decisions and proposes to the CJEU a strategy aimed at resolving these shortcomings going forward.


Author(s):  
NATALIA V. VARLAMOVA

Among the digital rights, besides the right for internet access that was the subject of consideration in the first part of the article, there are also a right to per-so nal data protection and a right to be forgotten (right to erasure).The right to personal data protection is usually enshrined at the supranational and national levels and is protected by the courts as an aspect of the right to privacy. As an independent fundamental right of a constitutional nature the right to personal data protection is enshrined in EU law. Nevertheless, all attempts to doctrinally justify the existence of certain aspects of this right, beyond the claims to the right to privacy, can not be considered successful. The Court of Justice of the EU, while dealing with the relevant cases in order to determine whether certain methods of processing personal data are legitimate, also refers to the right to privacy, considering these rights to be closely interrelated. The right to personal data protection provides additional (including procedural) guarantees of respect for privacy, human dignity and some other rights, but the purpose of these guarantees is precisely the content of the providing rights. The right to be forgotten (right to erasure) is one of the positive obligations with regard to the personal data protection. This right implies correction, deletion or termination of the processing of personal data at the request of their subject in the presence of a reason for this (when the relevant actions are carried out in violation of the principles of data processing or provisions of the legislation). Analogs of this right are the Latin American orders of habeas data, as well as the right of a person to demand the refutation of information discrediting his honor, dignity and business reputation, in case of their inconsistency with reality under civil law and the legislation on mass media. In digital age the importance of this right is increased by the fact that information posted on the Internet remains easily accessible for an indefinite, almost unlimited, time.This caused the extension of the right to be forgotten to information that is consistent to reality, but has lost its relevance and significance, however, continues to have an adverse impact on the reputation of the person concerned. At the same time, the realization of the right to be forgotten in respect of information posted online is connected with a number of technical problems that require legal solutions.In general, digitalization does not create new human rights of a fundamentally different legal nature. It only actualizes or smooths certain aspects of long-recognized rights, transfers their operation into the virtual space, creates new opportunities for their realization and generates new threats to them. Ensuring human rights in modern conditions involves the search for adequate legal solutions, taking into account the opportunities and limitations generated by digital technologies.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document