Why is the Society in England so scared of The Data Protection Act.

by truthseeker1969 26 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  truthseeker1969

  The IBSA seems terrifed of this law and all that relates to it.

  I have heard that if a subject access request is sent they have a "poop" moment and do all they can to destroy anything.

  Maybe Blondie can shed some light on this as I have heard that they destroyed everything and that when asked they will use every tactic to hide what they can and even tell elders to ignore requests.

  I am not sure what they most recent directive is on this in the UK but it seems they are terrified of being caught on this.
• 

  jwfacts

  I obtained my files in Australia using a similar act, but it took 3 years. Information about this is at http://jwfacts.com/watchtower/experiences/personal-files-privacy-act-1988.php

  There is a JWN poster from the UK that had similar success, but I cannot remember his name.

  Most of the information they hold is mundane, but there is always the potential for a lawsuit, and it means the elders have to be far more decerning on what they put to paper about the followers.
• 

  Slidin Fast

  Good point, they are absolutely paranoid about it. They even abandoned the use of S8s years ago and since then little bits of paper with not homes (hot gnomes) wer circulated. There was a long letter about what could and couldn't be done. This was to avoid congregations needing to be registered under the act.

  There were to be no records other than the publisher record cards kept and then only when the individual gave a signed waver. They are meticiulous about it. There are no written records to be kept of JC meetings at cong level. Nothing! There are two ways to deal with this legally. 1. To keep records and register under the act. 2. To avoid all record keeping and thus not be covered.

  Option 2 that was chosen on a cong. level means that any records kept are illegal and thus the soc. having given strict instructions as to what records can and can't be held will not be held resposible in th case of legal trouble. The elders are hung out to dry again.

  Interestingly the S8s have mysteriously and without fanfare found their way back into use.
• 

  truthseeker1969

  Hot Gnomes LMAO!

  Interesting info slidin.

  I had heard that a new batch of record cards had been sent out for all publishers to sign and this would allow them to hold information on people from then on but that if the card was not signed then they could hold nothing without the written consent of the individual.

  Not sure how this would work with someone who was disfellowshipped or da'd. Does that mean that their records would have to be deleted? I remember something about churches being told that once the relationship end between member and church then records must be destroyed.

  I just find it amusing they are so scared!
• 

  truthseeker1969

  JWfacts that was great what you were able to achieve.

  Most people would have given up but you had the hangers to keep going!

  I studied a bit about the act and how they can not give out information to other countries outwith the EU and a few others and yet the Bethel Spokesman said that they would find away around it. Not Good to admit that you break the law

  I am interested in hearing from anyone who has any knowledge of what can be done to be left alone.

  Thanks again
• 

  jwfacts

  I remember now, it was FOKYC that obtained his files in the UK.

  There is little to do to be left alone, but at least requesting the files adds workload to the organisation, and if enough people do it they will need to rethink their processes and what sort of information is stored on each publisher.

  I can't imagine the early Christians had filing cabinets keeping tabs on each other.
• 

  slimboyfat

  Interestingly the S8s have mysteriously and without fanfare found their way back into use.

  Have they? I thought they were long gone.
• 

  Slidin Fast

  Oh yeah! They are back.
• 

  mummatron

  As both the IBSA and the WTBTS of GB are registered as Data Controllers with the Information Commisioner's Office (ICO), they are now legally bound by The Act. So, they're scared because:

  1. Any alleged breach confirmed by the ICO would result in a criminal lawsuit. So it would be a publicised (i.e. forevermore in the British Law Journals) case of Regina vs. IBSA/WTBTS of GB.
  2. Prosecution under the Data Protection Act of 1998 carries a hefty penalty fine.
  3. Most importantly for the Society, revelations of breaches are snapped up by the ABP, British tabloid and broadsheet newspapers alike, and make for front page news. Can you imagine the fallout (or should that be JWs 'falling out' of The Truth?) that would ensue should a breach occur?!
  4. I guess they really don't want to broadcast the extent and detail of the personal data that they actually do collate over time!

  I personally feel that the advice given by WTBTS regarding S8's prior to The Act coming into effect in '98 was a case of panic due to their misinterpretation of The Act. I can see why S8's have made a comeback for logging NH's as a house name or number plus the accronym 'NH' doesn't qualify as identifying or personal data, whereas in-depth details regarding an answered call would if sufficient data identifying a person was recorded formally in writing. It's also reasonable that many records have been destroyed as generally data archiving of >7 years is rarely necessary in fields outside of medicine. Though with the WTBTS I'd guess that a mass dumping of files was probably down to a lack of understanding of The Act and what (old) data constitutes as exempt. Despite the fact that this particular Act of Parliament is available to read online in its entireity, it is often misunderstood by Data Controllers. For example, in one job where I worked as an IT Manager/Engineer I had to advise a company that required my firm to store some personal medical data on our servers as they (as the Data Controllers) didn't have a clue how The Act applied to them under those circumstances. It took a lot of paperwork just to get some simple data hosting set up that ensured that it was done within the Law.

  As for the WTBTS getting around The Act to transfer data from the UK to outside of the EU, check out this link from the ICO's site. I can see a few instances where this may be possible. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/29/section/60
• 

  truthseeker1969

  Mummatron:

  thank you for your input and I guess the best step forward is for information to be requested and see the result.

  my guess is that any information that they have they will destroy and claim that they have nothing about anyone who asks for it.

  it was noted that once a person ceases membership of a church then the processing of information is to cease and information destroyed but published instruction to elders clearly states that they are to keep files in violation of the act and that in future letters of recommendation are to be read and destroyed which again is a violation of the act.

  it is very hard to know when this organization tells the truth anymore which is a shame and it seems to be getting worse lately. I know from past experience many years ago that many people were happy to be part of a religion based on scripture but now is no more than a legal arm of a publishing empire with no particuar view of anything other than money.

  J R Brown is the one who said they would find a way around the law while Ted Jaracz said that they follow the laws and do not go beyond the things written, how sad!

  Any other information you have would be of benefit.

  Thanks to all for the replies