VPB 70.54: Opi­ni­on of the FOJ on the qua­li­fi­ca­ti­on of pri­va­te per­sons as organs of the community.

VPB 70.54: Opi­ni­on 051124 of the Fede­ral Office of Justi­ce of Novem­ber 24, 2005:

Data pro­tec­tion. Divi­si­on of powers bet­ween the Con­fe­de­ra­ti­on and the can­tons. Appli­ca­bi­li­ty of the FADP. Qua­li­fi­ca­ti­on of pri­va­te per­sons as organs of the com­mu­ni­ty. Super­vi­si­on of the Fede­ral Data Pro­tec­tion Com­mis­sio­ner (FDPIC). Can­to­nal and com­mu­nal Spi­tex services.

Art. 2 para. 1 let. a, Art. 29, Art. 37 FADP.

- The can­tons are exclu­si­ve­ly respon­si­ble for regu­la­ting data pro­tec­tion and ensu­ring effec­ti­ve data pro­tec­tion super­vi­si­on in can­to­nal sove­reign are­as (item 1).

- Pri­va­te per­sons are not only to be qua­li­fi­ed as organs of the com­mu­ni­ty if they are supe­ri­or to other pri­va­te per­sons by law. Other cri­te­ria can also lead to such a qua­li­fi­ca­ti­on, e.g. acting on the basis of a per­for­mance man­da­te or being finan­ced by the com­mu­ni­ty to a con­sidera­ble ext­ent (para. 3).

- If pri­va­te indi­vi­du­als are to be regard­ed as organs of a can­to­nal or com­mu­nal com­mu­ni­ty, data pro­tec­tion super­vi­si­on is the respon­si­bi­li­ty of the com­pe­tent can­to­nal or com­mu­nal aut­ho­ri­ties. If neces­sa­ry, the appli­ca­ble sub­stan­ti­ve data pro­tec­tion law must be deter­mi­ned by way of gap-fil­ling (item 4).

PDF:
[pdf-embedder url=“http://datenrecht.ch/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/2005 – 11-24-VPB-70.54.pdf“]