Security vs Privacy
Some children were lucky enough to have their own room or work station growing up. When you have your own space that no one enters without permission. You can keep all of your things there, away from the eyes of others. This is an example of a situation where you have privacy. The state of being free from unwanted attention or unsanctioned public intrusion. The right to privacy, however, is not absolute, as with all rights it really depends on measures taken by that jurisdiction to safeguard its interests. Say you do not have your own room or work station, instead you have a shared area or several areas that aims to provide the same opportunities but instead of a single permission, it is agreed that everyone in the space adheres to specific rules, codes of conduct, shared responsibilities and practice measures to protect each other collectively away from the intrusion of ‘others’. This is an example of a situation where you have security. Private individuals will then have to succumb to the regime prescribed for the public in order to stay within the lines of order.
Today, persons, natural and unnatural, are able to use words like the proverbial, ‘sticks and stones’, and yes they can hurt with just the same effect. However, times like these beg that we focus more so on the positives that words can bring, so yes, they can also protect and heal with lasting effects.
In recent news the Government of Jamaica was moved to redact their published intentions to advertize via notice in the local media — the identity of several citizens who applied to a grant programme that was geared towards financial relief for the many families affected by the Covid 19 pandemic. A couple the luminaries came out to state that this was a negative GDPR outlook and that the Jamaican DPA passed in 2020 strongly supports this position . I however hold a grater position. Personally identifiable information is not the same as sensitive or condfidential information. We should really take the time to consider what the law as a living breathing instrument is in essence. The better question here is what is the purpose of the law? Is it to silence the Governments efforts to assist those in obvious need? Or is it to enable Governments through policy provide access to the most persons possible by a means that is common to all no matter their socioeconomic reality. Good people will side with that later, and it is in this stead that the real difference between security and privacy will be characterized throughout this discourse.
History lends itself to many examples of how these same public ‘notices’ delivered great news in the past, for example: Common Entrance, GSAT, GCE results, international university scholarship passes, PATH beneficiaries as well as application processes for same, National Housing Trust (NHT)contributor’s refund as well as announcements for successful contributors listed for the newest housing scheme developments, pension scheme beneficiaries, National Health Fund (NHF)beneficiaries, government programmes for advancing education most recently in areas of STEM, programmes relating to youth involvement in sport, programmes advancing ‘eat what we grow’ initiatives through the Ministry of Agriculture, and the catch all programmes of Tourism which in all fairness is the true pulse of the nation. If these notices did not come out in the newspaper, how then would the regular folk be able to take advantage of these offerings? Better yet even the law takes the position that advertisements, certain legal notices, statements, disclosures, appointments, and other offerings ought to appear in the the local paper with prescribed frequency to even be considered as the advertizer’s best efforts to make the information known. Bearing in mind that internet coverage for the average household locally is still quite low. So just thinking that persons can ‘look it up online’ will not buffer the inadvertent lack of flow of quality internet connectivity in certain areas within the city and most areas outside of it.
The challenge was not how it was presented, it is just that it is being advertized. It is necessary however, considering the circumstances where no other provision was made, and access to food and other living amenities would otherwise be denied. Jamaica benefits from multimodal connectivity to the internet, with an overall internet penetration of 27.7% reported in 2010 and today 55% as reported by (Global Information Society Watch, Mona Geoinformatics Institute and the Mona ICT Policy Centre- Mona School of Business Management) however it is still not up to par with the standards of service some of our regional counterparts(Barbados, St. Kitts and Nevis and Cayman to name 3), not to mention globally, therefore brick and mortar methodology has to be in full effect until we get to greater penetration levels for complete reliance — so as to enjoy the ‘thrill of privacy’ that unfortunately disicentivizes those who are in the most need. The Governement’s approach should be one that is thoroughly advised based on the true impact of information desemination thoroughout the country, so as to serve its greatest source of intellectual property and maintain order and civility especially in times of uncertainties. Technically we have the infrastructure and the requisite communication countermeasures to mitigate harms, challenges or breaches of peronal information, however, in employing the standards of data processing, the Governement and other public bodies should never cower against the backdrop of privacy where it seeks to serve a greater good. Posting an intention to advertize the names and addresses was the right first step. Persons who wished to be notified using another method would then be responisble to contact the requisite office to have this done.
Any legal position that does not safeguard the people in process, should be shredded!
