The Data Protection Team at the Culture Media and Sport Department is seeking the views of stakeholders on the derogations in the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) which will apply in the UK from 25 May 2018.
The paper which calls for views can be found here [pdf]. Stakeholders are encouraged to submit their views through the DCMS online tool.
The call for views is split into themes, with the Government seeking views on the derogations contained in large number Articles of the GDPR
Of greatest interest to readers of Inforrm Theme 11 “Freedom of Expression in the Media”. The DCMS draw attention to Article 85 of the GDPR which provides that
1. Member States shall by law reconcile the right to the protection of personal data pursuant to this Regulation with the right to freedom of expression and information, including processing for journalistic purposes and the purposes of academic, artistic or literary expression.
2. For processing carried out for journalistic purposes or the purpose of academic artistic or literary expression, Member States shall provide for exemptions or derogations from Chapter II (principles), Chapter III (rights of the data subject), Chapter IV (controller and processor), Chapter V (transfer of personal data to third countries or international organisations), Chapter VI (independent supervisory authorities), Chapter VII (cooperation and consistency) and Chapter IX (specific data processing situations) if they are necessary to reconcile the right to the protection of personal data with the freedom of expression and information.
3. Each Member State shall notify to the Commission the provisions of its law which it has adopted pursuant to paragraph 2 and, without delay, any subsequent amendment law or amendment affecting them.
The Government seeks views on the derogations contained in this Article – which are similar to those in the Data Protection Directive. It seems likely that media organisations will be arguing that the current “journalistic exemption” in section 32 of the Data Protection Act 1998 should be preserved but the need for legislation on this issue presents an opportunity for the implementation of Sir Brian Leveson’s recommendations on data protection and the media.
The other “themes” on which views are sought are as follows:
- The supervisory authority (Articles 51, 53-54, 58-59, 62 and 90)
- Sanctions (Articles 36, 58, 83-84)
- Demonstrating compliance (Articles 40, 42-43)
- Data Protection Officers (Articles 4, 37-38)
- Archiving and Research (Article 89)
- Third Country Transfers (Article 49)
- Sensitive Personal data and exceptions (Article 9)
- Criminal Convictions (Article 10)
- Rights and remedies (Articles 17, 22, 26 and 80)
- Processing of Children’s Personal Data by Online Services (Article 8)
- Processing of Data (Articles 6, 18, 28-29, 32, 35, 37, 86-88)
- Restrictions (Article 23)
- Rules surrounding Churches and Religious Associations (Article 91).
The DCMS also asks an “additional question”
“In the context of the derogations above, what steps should the Government take to minimise the cost or burden to business of the GDPR?”
There is no “additional question” as to the steps that the Government should take to maximise privacy protection for individuals.
Any further information to support views can be sent by email to the DCMS on: GDPRCallforViews@culture.gov.uk
Reblogged this on World4Justice : NOW! Lobby Forum..