Refining the Concept of the Right to Data Protection in Article 8 ECFR – Part III

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 373-387
Author(s):  
M. von Grafenstein
Keyword(s):  
Data Protection ◽  
The Right

El derecho a ser informado como elemento esencial del derecho a la protección de datos. Una visión crítica de la jurisprudencia del Tribunal Constitucional y de su cambio de doctrina en la STC 39/2016

2016 ◽  
pp. 191-216
Author(s):  
Miguel Ángel CABELLOS ESPIÉRREZ
Keyword(s):  
Video Surveillance ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Surveillance Systems ◽  
Control Technology ◽  
Specific Regulation ◽  
The Right

LABURPENA: Lan eremuan bideozaintzaren erabilerak ondorio garrantzitsuak dakartza funtsezko eskubideei dagokienez, esate baterako intimitateari eta datu pertsonalen babesari dagokienez. Hala eta guztiz ere, oraindik ez daukagu araudi zehatz eta espezifikorik kontrol-teknika hori lan eremuan erabiltzeari buruz. Horrek behartuta, errealitate horri araudi-esparru anitz eta generikoa aplikatzeko modua auzitegiek zehaztu behar dute, kontuan hartuta, gainera, Espainiako Konstituzioaren 18.4 artikulua alde horretatik lausoa dela. Konstituzio Auzitegiak, datuen babeserako funtsezko eskubidea aztertzean, datuen titularraren adostasuna eta titular horri eman beharreko informazioa eskubide horretan berebizikoak zirela ezarri zuen; hortik ondorioztatzen da titularraren adostasuna eta hari emandako informazioa mugatuz gero behar bezala justifikatu beharko dela. Hala ere, Konstituzio Auzitegiak, duela gutxiko jurisprudentzian, bere doktrina aldatu du. Aldaketa horrek, lan eremuan, argi eta garbi langileak informazioa jasotzeko duen eskubidea debaluatzea dakar, bere datuetatik zein lortzen ari diren jakiteari dagokionez. RESUMEN: La utilización de la videovigilancia en el ámbito laboral posee importantes implicaciones en relación con derechos fundamentales como los relativos a la intimidad y a la protección de datos personales. Pese a ello, carecemos aún de una normativa detallada y específica en relación con el uso de dicha técnica de control en el ámbito laboral, lo que obliga a que sean los tribunales los que vayan concretando la aplicación de un marco normativo plural y genérico a esa realidad, dada además la vaguedad del art. 18.4 CE. El TC, al analizar el derecho fundamental a la protección de datos, había establecido el carácter central en él del consentimiento del titular de los datos y de la información que debe dársele a éste, de donde se sigue que cualquier limitación del papel de ambos deberá estar debidamente justificada. Sin embargo, en su más reciente jurisprudencia el TC ha realizado un cambio de doctrina que supone, en el ámbito laboral, una clara devaluación del derecho a la información por parte del trabajador en relación con qué datos suyos se están obteniendo. ABSTRACT : T he use of video surveillance systems within the work sphere has major implications for fundamental rights such as privacy and data protection. Nonetheless, we still lack of a detailed and specific regulation regarding the use of that control technology within the work sphere, which obliges courts to define the application of a plural and generic normative framework to that issue, given the vagueness of art. 18.4 of the Constitution. The Constitutional Court, when analyzing the fundamental right to data protection, had settled the centralityof the consent of the data rightholder and of the information to be provided to the latter, and from this it followed that any restriction on the role of both rights should be duly justified. However, in its most recent case law the Constitutional Court has changed its doctrine which means, within the work sphere, a clear devaluation of the right of information by the employee regarding the obtained data of him/her.

scholarly journals A Healthy Sense of Trust

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (Suppl. 1) ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Denis Horgan
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Big Data ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Fast Moving ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Personalised Medicine ◽  
Drug Pricing ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

In the fast-moving arena of modern healthcare with its cutting-edge science it is already, and will become more, vital that stakeholders collaborate openly and effectively. Transparency, especially on drug pricing, is of paramount importance. There is also a need to ensure that regulations and legislation covering, for example the new, smaller clinical trials required to make personalised medicine work effectively, and the huge practical and ethical issues surrounding Big Data and data protection, are common, understood and enforced across the EU. With more integration, collaboration, dialogue and increased trust among each and every one in the field, stakeholders can help mould the right frameworks, in the right place, at the right time. Once achieved, this will allow us all to work more quickly and more effectively towards creating a healthier - and thus wealthier - European Union.

scholarly journals La necesidad de una ley de protección de datos en salud

Bioderecho.es ◽  
2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
María Mercedes Serrano Pérez
Keyword(s):  
Data Protection ◽  
Personal Information ◽  
Right To Health ◽  
The Social ◽  
Social Side ◽  
The Right

Resumen: El tratamiento de la información personal en el contexto de la salud y de la investigación en salud ha de conjugar el derecho a la protección de datos de las personas con la necesidad de utilizar la información para la satisfacción de la vertiente colectiva que incorpora el derecho a la salud. El beneficio de dicha armonía repercute en toda la sociedad. Las leyes de protección de datos han de perseguir dicho objetivo.  Summary: The treatmen of personal information in the context of health and the investigation has to harmonize the right to data protection with the use of information to satisfy the social side of the right to health. The benefit of this relationship has an impact on society. Data protection laws pursue this objective

scholarly journals Personas datu aizsardzības mērķis un tiesiskā regulējuma vēsturiskā attīstība

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (13) ◽  
pp. 104-109
Author(s):  
Agnese Reine-Vītiņa
Keyword(s):  
Data Protection ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Population Census ◽  
Federal Republic Of Germany ◽  
Right To Privacy ◽  
Personal Data Protection ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right

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.

The Electronic Surveillance of Public Assemblies

2011 ◽  
pp. 59-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haralambos Anthopoulos
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Electronic Surveillance ◽  
Combined Analysis ◽  
The Public ◽  
European Court ◽  
Political Views ◽  
Protection Legislation ◽  
The Right ◽  
Shed Light

The electronic surveillance of public assemblies has been an issue highly debated in the Greek public arena. The circumstances that brought this internationally contested topic in the public focus were the parliamentary introduction of Law 3625/2007 in Greece and the legislative enactment of an exemption from the data protection legislation for all police activities involving data processing during public assemblies. This paper will argue that the electronic surveillance of public assemblies affects both the privacy of political views (political privacy) and the activism (public anonymity) of a citizen. Along this line, the paper offers a combined analysis of the right to data protection [Art. 9A] and the right to free assembly [Art. 11] as acknowledged in the Greek Constitution (1975/86/01/08). As underlined, both rights constitute the basis for the protection of political privacy and public anonymity and preclude any legislatively posed limitations to their enjoyment. In the end, three key cases of the European Court of Human Rights shed light to the legitimacy of such a ‘panoptic’ surveillance of public assemblies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document