‘Privacy by design’ in the EU General Data Protection Regulation: A new privacy standard or the Emperor’s new clothes?

Q3 Social Sciences South African law journal Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.47348/salj/v139/i3a4
D. Donnelly
{"title":"‘Privacy by design’ in the EU General Data Protection Regulation: A new privacy standard or the Emperor’s new clothes?","authors":"D. Donnelly","doi":"10.47348/salj/v139/i3a4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Privacy by design (‘PbD’) is a conceptual framework that has been widely adopted as a helpful, practical framework for organisations to ‘translate’ legal data protection principles into concrete technical design and organisational policies. It can offer a harmonising framework for multiple, overlapping legal compliance obligations. Privacy is engineered directly into the design of new technologies, as a default setting, while still achieving full functionality. The article explains the seven foundational principles of the concept with detailed cross reference to the relevant conditions of lawful processing under the Protection of Personal Information Act 4 of 2013 (‘POPIA’), offering the first in-depth analysis of PbD in a South African context. PbD is now an express legal obligation in art 25 of the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (2016). The article sketches the background to that important development and provides an in-depth critique of the three key shortcomings of art 25. It recommends that instead of following the EU example, South Africa’s Information Regulator could promote the adoption of PbD through a guidance note and in approved codes of conduct. It concludes that a PbD approach is already (albeit only impliedly) required for compliance with the conditions of lawful processing under POPIA.","PeriodicalId":39313,"journal":{"name":"South African law journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African law journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47348/salj/v139/i3a4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Privacy by design (‘PbD’) is a conceptual framework that has been widely adopted as a helpful, practical framework for organisations to ‘translate’ legal data protection principles into concrete technical design and organisational policies. It can offer a harmonising framework for multiple, overlapping legal compliance obligations. Privacy is engineered directly into the design of new technologies, as a default setting, while still achieving full functionality. The article explains the seven foundational principles of the concept with detailed cross reference to the relevant conditions of lawful processing under the Protection of Personal Information Act 4 of 2013 (‘POPIA’), offering the first in-depth analysis of PbD in a South African context. PbD is now an express legal obligation in art 25 of the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (2016). The article sketches the background to that important development and provides an in-depth critique of the three key shortcomings of art 25. It recommends that instead of following the EU example, South Africa’s Information Regulator could promote the adoption of PbD through a guidance note and in approved codes of conduct. It concludes that a PbD approach is already (albeit only impliedly) required for compliance with the conditions of lawful processing under POPIA.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
欧盟《一般数据保护条例》中的“设计隐私”:新的隐私标准还是皇帝的新衣?
隐私设计(“PbD”)是一个概念性框架,被广泛采用为组织将法律数据保护原则“转化”为具体的技术设计和组织政策的实用框架。它可以为多个重叠的法律合规义务提供一个协调框架。作为默认设置,隐私被直接设计到新技术的设计中,同时仍然实现完整的功能。本文解释了这一概念的七个基本原则,并详细参照了2013年《个人信息保护法》第4条(“POPIA”)下合法处理的相关条件,首次在南非背景下对PbD进行了深入分析。PbD现在是欧盟《通用数据保护条例》(2016)第25条中明确的法律义务。本文概述了这一重要发展的背景,并对第25条的三个主要缺点进行了深入的批评。它建议,南非的信息监管机构可以通过一份指导说明和批准的行为准则来促进PbD的采用,而不是效仿欧盟的例子。它的结论是,为了遵守POPIA下合法处理的条件,PbD方法已经(尽管只是隐含地)被要求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
South African law journal
South African law journal Social Sciences-Law
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
期刊最新文献
A legislative framework for shareholder approval of political donations and expenditure by companies in South Africa Reflecting on the tension between the development of the common law and the doctrine of separation of powers in Paulsen v Slip Knot Investments 777 (Pty) Ltd Notes: The Krugersdorp gang rapes — Another Tshabalala v S; Ntuli v S? Book Review: Tjakie Naudé & Daniel Visser (eds) The Future of the Law of Contract: Essays in Honour of Dale Hutchison (2021) The classification of a ‘maritime claim’ in South Africa under the Admiralty Jurisdiction Regulation Act
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1