Law about Privacy in the Philippines

The registration of the prepaid Mobile Subscriber Identity Module (SIM) has been challenged as an unconstitutional invasion of privacy. With the entry into force of the Data Protection Act 2012 and all the safeguards it provides, it is now claimed that the registration of prepaid SIM cards is a legitimate exercise of state police power. Covered persons are required to keep records of all transactions for five years from the date of the transactions and to keep them in a secure location. These records include the complete and truthful identity of the owners or account holders and any other identification documents of the client. To ensure confidentiality, all records must be kept confidential.6161§ 9(b); RIRR, Rule 9.2. Of course, reports of many crimes170170H. No. 525, 16th Congress (2013). A law that requires the registration of users of prepaid SIM cards and mobile phones, as well as for other purposes. may be considered sufficient grounds for asserting an overriding interest of the State. The need for law enforcement to register prepaid phones outweighs the perceived privacy challenges. The anonymity of prepaid mobile phones is a major obstacle to proper investigation of crimes and crimes, leaving society and victims with grave injustices.

1. Investigation or audit of related accounts.6666Rep. Act no. 9160 (2001), § 11. A unilateral court order must be obtained before the AMLC can investigate these accounts. The procedure for requesting a unilateral order to investigate the master account is the same for the procedure applicable to linked accounts. 2. Compliance with paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article III of the Constitution.6767 Id. The authority to investigate or audit the master account and associated accounts shall be in accordance with the requirements of Article III, sections 2 and 3, of the Constitution of 1987.6868 Const. III, § 2.

The right of persons to be safe in their person, home, papers and effects from improper search and seizure of any kind and for any purpose shall be inviolable and no warrant of search or arrest may be issued unless there is a probable reason personally established by the judge after an affidavit or assurance by the applicant and witnesses. presented by him. and, in particular, a description of the place to be searched and the persons or property to be seized. Chapter 3. (1) The secrecy of communications and correspondence is inviolable, unless there is a lawful order of the court or if security or public order otherwise requires, as prescribed by law. 2. Evidence obtained in violation of this or the preceding Section shall be inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding. Online privacy is primarily addressed by Republic Act No. 10175, known as the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 (“Cybercrime Prevention Act”). The Cybercrime Prevention Act protects data and computer systems, including by prohibiting violations of a person`s online privacy rights. Pollo emphasized the relevance of the surrounding circumstances: a particular act by the employer interferes with an employee`s right to privacy; the employee`s relationship to the seized object; whether the object was under the direct control of the employee at the time of seizure; and whether the employee has taken steps to protect his or her privacy on this point.3939 Pollo, G.R. No.

181881, supra note 32. It is important to note that the Supreme Court added that the reasonable expectation of privacy is nullified by the presence of a policy that warns their employees that they do not expect privacy to be respected in everything they create, store, send, or receive on desktop computers.4040 Id. In light of the above, privacy protection in an office is limited by the company`s work policies, the collective agreement, if any, and the employer`s inherent right to maintain discipline and efficiency in the workplace. Your expectation of privacy in a regulated office environment is reduced, and some interference with that privacy has been maintained.4141 SJS, G.R. No. 157870, footnote 33 above. In discussing traffic data collection, the Supreme Court of the Philippines noted that “if seemingly random portions of traffic data are collected, aggregated and analyzed in large quantities,” this would lead to the creation of “profiles of people under surveillance.” With enough traffic data, analysts may be able to determine a person`s close ties, religious views, political affiliations, and even sexual preferences. “2929 Id.

These clearly fall within the scope of matters protected by the right to privacy.3030 Id. Due to the lack of sufficient safeguards to protect constitutional guarantees and the vague purpose of the collection provision, the provision was declared unconstitutional. Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno in an individual opinion3131 Individual opinion in Disini, G.R. point 203335, supra note 1. It was clarified that the collection of real-time traffic data is not invalid in itself. However, there must be “robust safeguards” and an explanation of the need and nature of traffic data for real-time collection without a court order. In addition, in this opinion, the Commissioner underlines the importance for controllers to adopt data protection directives, which should include, inter alia: Much of the international community has already adapted to the times and has developed a registration system. There are more reasons for this in the Philippines, where almost all, about 96% in 2011, of mobile phone users are prepaid subscribers. The Data Protection Act 2012 applies to the “processing of all types of personal data and to any natural or legal person involved in the processing of personal data” 9595Rep. Act No. 10173 (2012), Section 4 of the Data Protection Act 2012.

With the exception of certain cases such as information concerning a person who is or has been an officer or employee of a government institution relating to the position or duties, 9696 § 4 (a)). Information processed for journalistic, artistic, literary or research purposes, 9797§ 4(d). Information Required for Banks and Financial Institutions, 9898§ 4(f). and personal data originally collected from residents of foreign jurisdictions in accordance with the laws of those foreign jurisdictions.9999§ 4(g). To this end, the DPA grants data subjects a number of rights in relation to their data, including the right to information about how their personal data is processed, the rectification of personal data concerning them and ordering the blocking, deletion or destruction of their personal data. In particular, the DPA was also the first data protection law in the APAC region to grant data subjects an explicit right to data portability, which applies when personal data is processed electronically and in a structured and commonly used format. In order to ensure compliance with data protection laws and to strengthen monitoring for threats and vulnerabilities that may compromise the protection of personal data, the NPC requires ICPs and PIPs to submit an annual report summarizing all security incidents and personal data breaches. The annual report should include all security incidents and personal data breaches related to prior informed consent and PIP between 1 January and 31 December of the previous year. In addition, it should include a summary of all security breaches and the total number of incidents that did not result in any breaches. The Anti-Money Laundering Act 2001, as amended (“AMLA”), which was enacted to deal with money laundering, also contains safeguards to protect privacy. The AMLA established the Anti-Money Laundering Council (“AMLC”), which, together with other relevant agencies, is responsible for implementing its provision.5858 The Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP), the Insurance Commission (IC) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) have issued the revised implementing rules and regulations (RIRR) of Law No. 9160.

PASB also issued Circular No. 706, 2011 series, updated anti-money laundering rules and regulations for banks, trust companies and other institutions under its supervision.