Privacy Overhaul Imminent for Australia--A Reference to China

Australia has had a range of general and sector-specific privacy laws for 20 years. At the Federal level, the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) initially regulated the way in which Commonwealth agencies dealt with the personal information of Australians. The scope of the Privacy Act was expanded to also cover the handling of individuals' credit information and, more broadly in 2001, to cover all private sector organisations and the way in which they collect, use and disclose personal information. Individual States and Territories of Australia also have specific privacy laws that regulate the way State-based agencies deal with personal information, and laws relating to privacy are also found in a variety of legislative contexts.

The result is that Australia has a myriad of privacy-related laws at different levels of Australian Government covering an often overlapping range of issues. This situation was one of the drivers behind a substantive review by the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) into Australia's privacy laws.
 

By Michelle Rowland, Sarah Alderson of the Communications & Technology Group of Gilbert + Tobin.
 

Kalley Chen, Dai Chen and Xu Zifeng, of King & Wood.

King & Wood established a strategic alliance with Gilbert + Tobin in November 2007.

 

On 11 August 2008, ALRC released a report "For Your Information: Australian Privacy Law and Practice". The report is a massive 3,000 pages and adopts a "principles-based" approach to regulation by making 295 recommendations. These changes will impact on all private sector organisations and the way in which they collect, use or disclose personal information.
The ALRC's view is that "principles-based" regulation should be the primary method of regulating information privacy in Australia, supplemented by specific rules to address particular issues that arise in relation to certain industries. This "principles-based" approach contrasts to "bright line" or "complex and detailed rules" approaches where rules for specific situations are detailed in legislation.

The ALRC has recommended a basic restructure of privacy regulation following a three-tiered approach:
 

1) high-level principles of general application, to be encapsulated as the new "Unified Privacy Principles" ("UPPs")provided in a streamlined Privacy Act;


2) regulations and industry codes detailing the handling of personal information in certain specified contexts, such as health and research and credit reporting; and


3) the issuance of further guidance by the Privacy Commissioner (and other relevant regulators) dealing with operational matters and explaining to end users what is expected in various circumstances, as well as providing basic advice and education.
 

Principles-based privacy regulation has advantages, as well as shortcomings, for private sector organisations. It often means that legislative certainty is compromised: flexibility for a regulator to respond to changed circumstances is achieved at the expense of predictability, with the result that an organisation can never be sure of the rules. Provided, however, that the regulator implementing the principles gives clear guidance as to how they are to be applied at any particular point in time and provides adequate notice of changes to that guidance, principles-based regulation can have the benefit of allowing the law to adapt to rapidly-evolving areas, particularly to address the privacy implications of new and emerging technologies.
 

Across the waters, China's legislature is watching Australia work through its imminent privacy overhaul. Currently, China's Constitution Law prohibits the infringement of the inherent dignity of the human person and their residence, and protects freedom and security of communication. Personal Privacy is partly and principally protected under the fundamental laws. Notwithstanding that there is no express right to privacy in China's Civil Law General Principles , the administrative laws and regulations contain special regulations regarding protection of privacy based on investigation, secrecy and public hearings. The scope of personal information is expanded to include the sale of personal information pursuant to the Amendments to the Criminal Law (VII) (draft) . In addition, disadvantaged groups and professionals, such as minors, lawyers, and doctors, are required to take steps for protection of clients' personal information. In civil judicatory trials, the People's Court is required to accept matters where a party makes a claim for damages as a result of psychological harm caused due to infringement of their privacy. However, the claimant can only bring an action for compensation to the extent that their reputation is damaged from infringement of their privacy . There is no specific mention in the regulations about when an invasion of privacy takes place but does not lead to infringement of reputation. Overall, regulation in respect of protection of privacy in China is scattered and the scope of personal information requires clarification, especially in relation to what constitutes personal information. 
 

 

Click here for complete article.

Privacy: New Developments in the Protection of Personal Information

Finally, it seems that the first light of dawn in a quieter world has been shown to people who have been continuously bombarded by anonymous messages or phone calls via mobile and other communication channels for private tutoring, apartment sales, and insurance.

On the 25th of August 2008, the 4th Conference of the Standing Committee of the 11th National People’s Congress (NPC) deliberated on The 7th Amendment to the PRC Criminal Law (draft). The Draft is the first time a proposal for providing protection of personal information by imposing criminal charges for violations on such information was put forward. This has raised broad public attention at all levels.


Li Yongmei, associate, Domestic Dispute Resolution

 

The current legal protections for personal information appear loosely in various laws including the Constitution and other Civil and Criminal Laws. The protections are presented in the forms of certain individual articles in the varying pieces of legislation. These provisions mainly protect a citizen's right to communications freedom, communications security and privacy in general and do not cover basic personal information such as personal address, phone numbers, etc.

Furthermore, the current applications of these articles are limited. Take for example the “crime of infringing upon a citizen's right to freedom of correspondence” provided for in the Criminal Law, Article 252, which provides not only the true intent of the law (the right to freedom of correspondence), the target of crime (the letters) but also requires “the circumstance is serious” as the standard of conviction. It is not easy for these provisions to be adapted to the developments of the information age as writing physical letters has declined.

In deliberating the Draft, a strong message that the constitutional principle of “respect for and insuring Human Rights” will also be embodied in the field of personal information protection, and such protection will mark an important step for respecting personal liberty and dignity.

Even more exciting is that the legislative process for the Personal Information Protection Law, started in 2005, is now entering a new phase. The Personal Information Protection Law (Draft) has been submitted to the State Council for discussion. We are now looking forward to success during the deliberation  as well as the release of the Personal Information protection Law in the near future. This will help create a comprehensive system for the protection of personal information and provide effective legal safeguards to right of privacy.

 

个人信息法律保护的新发展

那些为一对一辅导、售楼信息、不厌其烦的保险代理骚扰的人们终于看见了喧嚣世界突然安静下来的曙光。

8月25日,十一届全国人民代表大会常务委员会第四次会议对《中华人民共和国刑法修正案(七)(草稿)》进行初审。该草案首次提出对公民个人信息进行刑法保护,引发了社会各界的广泛关注。

现行法律对个人信息的保护主要散落在宪法、刑法、民商事法律等领域,以单行法中个别条款的方式表现。这些条款以保护公民通信自由及通信秘密、隐私权为主,未涵盖基本的个人信息,例如住址及电话等,且保护条件较为严苛。以现行刑法中的“侵犯通信自由罪”为例,该罪不仅规定了特殊的犯罪客体和犯罪对象,还以“情节严重”为定罪起点。仅依靠这些条款的保护力度显然落后于信息时代的发展要求。

《刑法修正案(七)(草稿)》的审议无疑发出了一个强烈的信号,即随着社会进步,尊重和保障人权的宪法原则在个人信息保护领域得以具体化,体现了法律和社会对个人自由和尊严的尊重。

更为可喜的是,2005年启动的个人信息保护法立法程序现已进入新阶段。《个人信息保护法(草案)》已呈交国务院讨论。我们期待着《刑法修正案(七)》能够顺利通过审议,更进一步期待《个人信息保护法》尽早出台。从而形成较为完善的中国个人信息保护法律体系,使公民解脱“透明人”的担忧,公民个人隐私、尊严及安全得到切实有效的法律保障。

李咏梅, 国内诉讼仲裁组