Take-Aways (AI)
  • Par­lia­ment elects new data pro­tec­tion offi­cer Adri­an Lob­si­ger via con­fir­ma­ti­on con­cept, despi­te con­cerns about pro­xi­mi­ty to the admi­ni­stra­ti­on and lack of tech experience.
  • Key chal­lenges: Big data, open data, e‑patient dos­siers, glo­bal data trans­fer and the upco­ming revi­si­on of the Data Pro­tec­tion Act.

NZZ of 2.3.2016: Fede­ral Data Pro­tec­tion Offi­cer – The Choice That Is Not One

In two weeks, Par­lia­ment will elect the new Data Pro­tec­tion and Public Infor­ma­ti­on Com­mis­sio­ner, the suc­ces­sor to Hans­pe­ter Thür, an inde­pen­dent cam­pai­gner for data pro­tec­tion and the prin­ci­ple of public access. To speak of an “elec­tion” is an exag­ge­ra­ti­on, howe­ver, becau­se the­re is no real choice of can­di­da­tes. It is rather a con­fir­ma­ti­on (or rejec­tion) of the can­di­da­te pro­po­sed by the Fede­ral Coun­cil: Adri­an Lob­si­ger, depu­ty direc­tor of the Fede­ral Office of Poli­ce (Fed­pol). In the run-up, various par­lia­men­ta­ri­ans expres­sed doubts about Lobsiger’s abili­ty to make the tran­si­ti­on from “data coll­ec­tor” to data pro­tec­tor. They cri­ti­ci­zed his pro­xi­mi­ty to the admi­ni­stra­ti­on and his lack of expe­ri­ence in deal­ing with new technologies. […] 

The Par­lia­men­ta­ry Judi­cial Com­mis­si­on has for­mal­ly appro­ved the elec­tion pro­ce­du­re and recom­mends the offi­ci­al can­di­da­te for elec­tion “wit­hout dis­sen­ting vote”. Nevert­hel­ess, the­re were a con­sidera­ble num­ber of abst­en­ti­ons, as com­mis­si­on pre­si­dent Roland Eber­le confirms. […] 

In fact, this is how the elec­tion pro­ce­du­re is ancho­red in the Data Pro­tec­tion Act. Par­lia­men­ta­ri­ans from the left to the right now want to chan­ge this. Appro­pria­te pro­po­sals are in the pipeline. […] 

In the back­ground, Grü­ter is try­ing to pre­vent Lob­si­ger from being elec­ted. But he is likely to be in a losing posi­ti­on. Alt­hough the SVP fac­tion only sup­ports the only can­di­da­te with a nar­row majo­ri­ty, the SP and FDP fac­tions have backed him by a lar­ge majo­ri­ty. On Tues­day, the CVP also came out in favor of Lob­si­ger wit­hout any dis­sen­ting votes. Even with the Greens, he left “a sur­pri­sin­gly good impres­si­on” in the hea­ring, accor­ding to Glättli. […] 

The main chal­lenges in data protection

[…]The­se are the gre­at chal­lenges for the future data protector: 
  • Big data: Data is beco­ming a raw mate­ri­al. In the future, it will not only be pos­si­ble to store data for spe­ci­fic pur­po­ses, but also to link and eva­lua­te it in lar­ge quan­ti­ties from various sources – for exam­p­le, for effi­ci­ent and safe road traf­fic. Big data repres­ents gre­at eco­no­mic poten­ti­al, but it also threa­tens pri­va­cy when infor­ma­ti­on from dif­fe­rent are­as of life is syste­ma­ti­cal­ly struc­tu­red, coll­ec­ted and evaluated.
  • Open data: The aut­ho­ri­ties have valuable data resour­ces that should be made available to the public. Per­so­nal data is not typi­cal­ly part of this, but if infor­ma­ti­on about the use of public trans­port ser­vices, for exam­p­le, is lin­ked to other data, it may be pos­si­ble to estab­lish a per­so­nal connection.
  • Digi­tizati­on is incre­a­sing­ly sha­ping the heal­th­ca­re system. The rule here is that the bet­ter the exch­an­ge of infor­ma­ti­on bet­ween doc­tors, hos­pi­tals and labo­ra­to­ries, the bet­ter the qua­li­ty of tre­at­ment. But insu­rance com­pa­nies are also inte­re­sted in health data. Against this back­ground, how trans­pa­rent should pati­ents beco­me? In the next few years, the law on elec­tro­nic pati­ent files will be imple­men­ted. Data pro­tec­tion offi­cers will have cer­tain super­vi­so­ry duties.
  • Glo­bal data traf­fic: Goog­le, Face­book and Ama­zon trans­fer data and trade in it glo­bal­ly. But the under­stan­ding of data pro­tec­tion dif­fers from con­ti­nent to con­ti­nent. In the USA, data pro­tec­tion is frag­men­ted by law, and basic digi­tal rights are less pro­no­un­ced than in Euro­pe. Last fall, the Euro­pean Court of Justi­ce declared the so-cal­led “Safe Har­bor Agree­ment,” which regu­la­tes data exch­an­ge bet­ween the EU and the U.S., inva­lid. The ruling will also have an impact on Swiss data pro­tec­tion legislation.
  • Revi­si­on of the Data Pro­tec­tion Act: The Fede­ral Coun­cil announ­ced the revi­si­on last year. A preli­mi­na­ry draft is to be adopted by fall 2016 at the latest, with data pro­tec­tion to be streng­the­ned and, in par­ti­cu­lar, deve­lo­p­ments at Euro­pean level to be taken into account.