Relevant parts of the Data Protection Act and my take on their meaning

Relevant parts of the Data Protection Act and my take on their meaning.

"data controller" means, subject to a person who (either alone or jointly or in common with other persons) determines the purposes for which and the manner in which any personal data are, or are to be, processed

Is this Westwood? I won’t know until I get sent my e-mail regarding his job description, until then, I can only assume not.

"data processor", in relation to personal data, means any person (other than an employee of the data controller) who processes the data on behalf of the data controller

This one is easy, it is someone within Humberside police, it isn’t relevant though.

"Processing", in relation to information or data, means obtaining, recording or holding the information or data or carrying out any operation or set of operations on the information or data, including-

(a) Organisation, adaptation or alteration of the information or data,

(b) Retrieval, consultation or use of the information or data,

(d) Alignment, combination, blocking, erasure or destruction of the information or data;

So the data controller has to process it. Interesting, surely since he has the CHOICE to either keep/delete etc It is up to him, under his understanding of the act to process it as he sees fit.

In this Act "sensitive personal data" means personal data consisting of information as to-

(a) The racial or ethnic origin of the data subject,

(b) His political opinions,

(d) Whether he is a member of a trade union (within the meaning of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992),

(e) His physical or mental health or condition,

(f) His sexual life,

(g) The commission or alleged commission by him of any offence, or

(h) Any proceedings for any offence committed or alleged to have been committed by him, the disposal of such proceedings or the sentence of any court in such proceedings.

Yes, so it should have been processed, which processed would that be, since they were only allegations, maybe they should be deleted, its upto the controller anyway.

''''''THE PRINCIPLES

1. Personal data shall be processed fairly and lawfully and, in particular, shall not be processed unless-

(a) at least one of the conditions in Schedule 2 is met, and

(b) in the case of sensitive personal data, at least one of the conditions in Schedule 3 is also met.

2. Personal data shall be obtained only for one or more specified and lawful purposes, and shall not be further processed in any manner incompatible with that purpose or those purposes.
3. Personal data shall be adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to the purpose or purposes for which they are processed.
4. Personal data shall be accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date.
5. Personal data processed for any purpose or purposes shall not be kept for longer than is necessary for that purpose or those purposes.
6. Personal data shall be processed in accordance with the rights of data subjects under this Act.
7. Appropriate technical and organisational measures shall be taken against unauthorised or unlawful processing of personal data and against accidental loss or destruction of, or damage to, personal data.
8. Personal data shall not be transferred to a country or territory outside the European Economic Area unless that country or territory ensures an adequate level of protection for the rights and freedoms of data subjects in relation to the processing of personal data.''''''

Schedule 3

(b) Is carried out with appropriate safeguards for the rights and freedoms of data subjects, ...

(d) Does not involve disclosure of the personal data to a third party without the consent of the data subject. ...

5. The information contained in the personal data has been made public as a result of steps deliberately taken by the data subject...

I don’t think Huntley would have appreciated alleged assaults committed by him stopping him from gettng a job, especially since they were only alleged. Innocent until proven guilty right? (b) Suggests to me that Huntley's files should have been kept confidential, if not erased.

"Third party", in relation to personal data, means any person other than-

(a) The data subject,

(b) The data controller, or

Hmm, should you send it to them, after all he is going to be a caretaker, he is hardly going to end up getting into direct contact with the kids and I sure as hell wouldn’t go into the house of any caretakers at my school.

(a) the processing of those data or their processing for that purpose or in that manner is causing or is likely to cause substantial damage or substantial distress to him or to another, and

(b) that damage or distress is or would be unwarranted.

Does that mean, Holly and Jessica, or possible rape victims or Huntley himself? Impossible for me to assert.

What a steaming pile of wishy-washy bullshit, I cannot comprehend how anybody can tolerate being told just to process something. If it was Westwood's duty, then how was he supposed to deal with the information? One thing is for sure, the Data Protection Act didn’t tell him and nor did Blunkett. If Westwood didn’t make the decision, somebody else in his place would have, and now someone else does have to, since Westwood has been suspended. What has he been suspended for? Working to the best of his ability? Maybe Blunkett should be suspended for working to the best of his ability, under assertions he makes of the poorly worded laws. Hang on, doesn’t he make the laws? Well then, if anybody is to blame its him.

*Note, I know he didn’t make this law, but he is in a better position to make it less vague than Westwood is (or was).

Sorry, I know it was boring but you have to read it to get a better understanding. The full un-abridged version is available at:

http://www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1998/19980029.htm

back to index

This website is hosted for free by

. Get your own Free Website now!