Interesting stuff.
2015-11-18-BOE--Credits to jwfacts!
by Atlantis 31 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
NeverKnew
Maybe someone's blaming the current lawyers for the financial challenges or not in agreement with the lawyers strategies... Maybe like changing a policy of some sort to comply with the law or to make adjustments for ethical reasons? -
defender of truth
steve2
Good point joe. I'd only add that police have legislative backing for their information gathering and storing - even without individual's consent - for obvious reasons.
However, I wonder about the right of a religious organization to gather information on specified individuals without their even knowing it is being gathered and stored.
If you are still interested, maybe have a look at the APP's (Australian Privacy Principles)
www.oaic.gov.au/privacy-law/privacy-act/australian-privacy-principles
"APP 3 provides that an APP entity must collect personal information only by lawful and fair means, and must (where reasonable and practicable) collect personal information about an individual directly from that individual.
In addition, ‘sensitive information’ may generally only be collected if the individual about whom the information relates has consented to the collection.
‘Sensitive information’ means information about an individual’s racial or ethnic origin; political opinions; membership of a political association; religious beliefs or affiliations; philosophical beliefs; membership of a professional or trade association; membership of a trade union; sexual orientation or practices; criminal record; health information about an individual; genetic background, or biometric identification (such as fingerprints that is to be used for the purpose of automated biometric verification)."
Summary of the australian privacy principles"The biggest implication of these new laws is that bodies collecting and storing data (that’s potentially your company) can now be fined up to 1.7m per infringement.
The Privacy Amendment Act includes a set of new, harmonised privacy principles called Australian Privacy Principles (APPs). These APPs will regulate the handling of personal information by both businesses and Australian government agencies.
Sensitive information
3.3 An APP entity must not collect sensitive information about an individual unless:
(a) the individual consents to the collection of the information and:
(i) if the entity is an agency – the information is reasonably necessary for, or directly related to, one or more of the entity’s functions or activities; or
(ii) if the entity is an organisation – the information is reasonably necessary for one or more of the entity’s functions or aactivities"
www.cohortglobal.com/changes-to-australian-privacy-laws-effective-march-2014/
"Further the principles make it mandatory for organisations to give the option of client-anonymity. Good practice for internet trading and other electronic data collection is to include an opt-out clause when gathering client information.
Failure to maintain data integrity or to ensure that information is collected through compliant methods, may present substantial financial and reputational risks.
The obligations of the Act and the Privacy Principles are enforceable by the Australian Information Commissioner (AIC). As part of the legislative amendment, the Commissioner’s regulatory powers have been expanded with powers to investigate perceived breaches.
The AIC is empowered to conduct privacy audits of any Australian government body or regulated private organisation; where serious breaches are found, the Commissioner can penalise APP entities up to $1.1 million."
Not for profit compliance essentials"There are no exemptions for Not-for-Profit or charitable entities."
(Some of the links wouldn't fit on the page, that's why they are posted in blue text)
---------
Can someone please send a copy of this letter to the Australian Information Commission, and ask if they think APP 3.3 may apply here? They might be very interested in this apparent breach of privacy..
(Maybe you could phone the enquiry line and ask if this applies, if you live in Australia)
www.oaic.gov.au/about-us/contact-us
Please let us know if you get any response, or at least PM me, as this post took a while to put together. ;)
-
stuckinarut2
Great post "defender of truth"!
Thanks for that in depth info, and fantastic links!
-
wannaexit
They want private information on people without their permission. Unbelievable!!! -
Listener
DOT, If you continue on from Sect 3.3 that you quoted from the Privacy Act it appears that it doesn't apply. I've highlighted and underlined the sections that may be applicable.
3.3 An APP entity must not collect sensitive information about an individual unless:
(a) the individual consents to the collection of the information and:
(i) if the entity is an agency—the information is reasonably necessary for, or directly related to, one or more of the entity’s functions or activities; or
(ii) if the entity is an organisation—the information is reasonably necessary for one or more of the entity’s functions or activities; or
(b) subclause 3.4 applies in relation to the information.
3.4 This subclause applies in relation to sensitive information about an individual if:
(a) the collection of the information is required or authorised by or under an Australian law or a court/tribunal order; or
(b) a permitted general situation exists in relation to the collection of the information by the APP entity; or
(c) the APP entity is an organisation and a permitted health situation exists in relation to the collection of the information by the entity; or
(d) the APP entity is an enforcement body and the entity reasonably believes that:
(i) if the entity is the Immigration Department—the collection of the information is reasonably necessary for, or directly related to, one or more enforcement related activities conducted by, or on behalf of, the entity; or
(ii) otherwise—the collection of the information is reasonably necessary for, or directly related to, one or more of the entity’s functions or activities; or
(e) the APP entity is a non‑profit organisation and both of the following apply:
(i) the information relates to the activities of the organisation;
(ii) the information relates solely to the members of the organisation, or to individuals who have regular contact with the organisation in connection with its activities.
Note: For permitted general situation, see section 16A. For permitted health situation, see section 16B.A JW is not a member of the WTBTS Sydney Branch but as to whether they have 'regular contact with the organization in connection with its activities' could possibly be argued. I would think that the WTBTS would argue that letters are regularly read out that have been sent by the Branch and most of the publications would come from there also.
-
defender of truth
Fair enough, Joe.
But I still think it would be worth posting or emailing the letter to the Australian Information Commission, and let THEM decide for themselves.
(i) the information relates to the activities of the organisation;
Look again at each bullet point on the letter..
Humility/ spirituality of the person and their families, meeting attendance and time spent in the ministry, action and speech regarding theocratic arrangements, along with marital status.. and the final bullet point mentions 'any additional comments' which could mean anything..
All very personal information that should not, IMHO, be necessary for them to know about those who are (we can only presume because they don't even state the reason behind their information request) to be used as accountants, solicitors and barristers.
Let the Watchtower defend themselves, it's worth a shot..
Please can someone send the Commission a copy of the letter?
It would be brilliant if someone could post them a copy, if you live in Australia..
-
defender of truth
Very sorry, my reply was to Listener, don't ask why I typed Joe, lol! Not well at the moment. -
Listener
DOT, I telephoned the OAIC this morning, it didn't take long to get through and the lady was very helpful with an excellent understanding of the issues.
She believed that it was within the scope of the Act that the WTBTS could collect the sensitive information however they are not permitted to do this without the consent or knowledge of the individual. They are required to notify the individual of this information gathering and advise what is being collected and for what purpose, unless it was impracticable. Given the circumstances - that a letter was being sent to all congregations, she felt that their organization would not view it as impracticable because they had already demonstrated that they were able to communicate easily by sending out a letter to all congregations and taking that one step further by sending it to all individuals was possible (I did mention that their were over 60,000 members and she saw no reason thy it would be impractiable or unreasonable for individuals to be informed).
She went on further to explain that the Elders collecting this information could also be in breach.
The Act generally applies to organizations with a turnover of over $3 million. The WTBTS Sydney used to claim that their turnover was under this amount as it didn't include donations. Paul Grundy did a lot of research on this and information can be found on his website and includes this comment
In 2009, after a period of 3 years, the Commissioner received legal advice that for a certainty the definition of turnover in the Privacy Act was intended to include donations.
http://jwfacts.com/watchtower/experiences/personal-files-privacy-act-1988.php
I said to her that I understand that the individual congregations were established as separate legal entities and that their turnover was likely to be under $3 million each. She said that this did not mean that the Commission would view them as separate and if not, the Elders were subject to the Privacy Act.
She advised that they would investigate the matter if an individual to whom this would affect, wrote/emailed in with the details. If another person wanted to write in they would need to specify to which individual/s this affected and show evidence that they have their permission to write in on their behalf.
-----------------------------------
DOT, notice the clause that I quoted was specifically addressing 'sensitive' information which includes such things as gender, religious and philosophical beliefs and as that it could be argued that activities of the org. are centred around the promotion of specific religious beliefs. The OAIC Officer indicated that the type of information being requested was likely to be within the guidelines.
The area that the OAIC Officer indicated that they could be in breach is found in this section
3.6 An APP entity must collect personal information about an individual only from the individual unless:
It seems to be a general practice with Australian Government Departments that they want factual cases to be identified for them to take further action. They want names of people who may be affected or of those involved.
(a) if the entity is an agency:
(i) the individual consents to the collection of the information from someone other than the individual; or
(ii) the entity is required or authorised by or under an Australian law, or a court/tribunal order, to collect the information from someone other than the individual; or
(b) it is unreasonable or impracticable to do so.
Solicited personal information
3.7 This principle applies to the collection of personal information that is solicited by an APP entity. -
Slidin Fast
"The biggest implication of these new laws is that bodies collecting and storing data (that’s potentially your company) can now be fined up to 1.7m per infringement.
I think they'd better get a lawyer! Maybe they should just Pay.