Articles

GDPR: Accountability is the new paradigm

GDPR: Accountability is the new paradigm

GDPR: Accountability is the new paradigm

15.04.2016

From now on, data controllers must notify the competent data protection authority (“DPA”) about their data processing activities.

However, an exemption to this obligation (also known as “alternative obligation”) is allowed by certain EU Member States, such as Germany, if these conditions are met: (i) a data protection officer (“DPO”) is appointed in the company and (ii) records of the processing activities are kept and updated. Under the new GDPR, this approach is preferred over the traditional notification obligation. The EU legislature tries to heighten data controllers’ accountability by replacing the notification obligation with alternative obligations. Here, we will focus on the two main alternative obligations that shape this heightened accountability principle: (i) the obligation to keep records and (ii) the obligation to conduct data protection impact assessments (“DPIAs”). The specific role of the DPO will be discussed in another publication later on.

Records of processing operations and cooperation with the DPAs

Every data controller must keep records pertaining to all aspects of the data processing operations under its responsibility. This broadly includes the information that must already be notified to the Belgian or Dutch DPA under the current legal framework, i.e., contact details of the data controller, categories of personal data processed, recipients of the data, international transfers, retention periods. The GDPR now also imposes such record-keeping obligation on data processors and compels both data controllers and data processors to cooperate with their DPA and make these records available upon request.

Furthermore, if certain appropriate data protection policies are proportional to the specific processing activities, the data controller must implement them. Such policies are supposed to create awareness and to inform and train the data controller’s staff on data protection issues.

DPIAs

The GDPR also introduces the requirement that DPIAs must be conducted for certain high-risk data processing operations such as processing activities that can create a risk of discrimination, identity theft, fraud, or financial loss. A DPIA is especially required for (i) a systematic and extensive evaluation of natural persons through automated processing activities (e.g., profiling)  that produces  legal effects or significantly affect the individual  (this could potentially include website analytics tools, the creation of motion profiles by  mobile applications, or the creation of personal profiles by social media networks); (ii) large-scale processing of sensitive data such as biometric data or criminal conviction records, and (iii) systematic large-scale monitoring of a publicly accessible area such as monitoring through the use of optic-electronic devices such as CCTV video surveillance.

A DPIA should consist at least of (i) a description of the envisaged processing operation and the purpose of the processing (What does the processing encompass and what purpose does it serve?); (ii) an assessment of the proportionality and the necessity of the processing operation in relation to the purposes (Is the processing reasonable in light of the purposes?); (iii) an assessment of the risks that can affect the rights and freedoms of the individuals whose data are being processed (the “data subjects”); and (iv) the measures envisaged to be taken (a) to address these risks, including safeguards and security measures and (b) to demonstrate compliance. Apart from these four pointers, the GDPR does not contain any concrete guidance on how to conduct a DPIA. We expect that this will be picked up by the DPAs, as this has already been done by the CNIL in France.

In addition, if the results of the DPIA show that the processing operations would result in a high risk that cannot be mitigated by appropriate measures in terms of available technology and costs of implementation, the data controller must consult the DPA prior to the start of the processing operations. Again, the outcome of such consultations is likely to vary depending on the DPA concerned.

Upcoming Challenges

Going forward, companies should verify whether they have adequate records of all data processing operations and make sure such records are being kept up to date. This will in practice require companies to assign specific resources to ensure regular updates and follow-up of those records. In addition, companies will need to verify whether any of the processing operations it wishes to undertake requires a DPIA and consult the DPAs as appropriate.

Last but not least, companies will need to check whether they have suitable technical and organizational measures in place to ensure and demonstrate compliance with the GDPR. To this end, companies can find guidance in the indications given by a DPO or in the guidelines that can be issued by the European Data Protection Board.

The global approach in terms of accountability adopted in the GDPR does not leave much room for tailoring the regulatory requirements to the specific type of organization concerned. This can have financial consequences on the smaller organizations and will also trigger a heavy administrative burden for all of them.

This article was co-written by alumnus Cédric Lindenmann.

To read more about this series of articles (and the articles that were published previously), please click here.

Team

Related news

08.11.2019 EU law
Erik Valgaeren is session chair during IBA's 6th Biennial Technology Law Conference in Berlin

Speaking slot - Stibbe's TMT partner, Erik Valgaeren, chairs a session discussing the new legal challenges, created by the most recent technological developments in the field of software, data, online services and telecom, including 5G, pricing algorithms, platforms and data monetization. This session will take place on the 8th of November 2019 in Berlin.

Read more

08.11.2019 BE law
Interview with Wouter Ghijsels on Next Gen lawyers

Articles - Stibbe’s managing partner Wouter Ghijsels shares his insights on the next generation of lawyers and the future of the legal profession at the occasion of the Leaders Meeting Paris where Belgian business leaders, politicians and inspiring people from the cultural and academic world will discuss this year's central theme "The Next Gen".

Read more

13.11.2019 NL law
Een strategisch actieplan voor het gebruik van AI door de overheid

Short Reads - Een paar jaren geleden hoorde je er nog nauwelijks over, maar nu kan je er bijna niet meer om heen: kunstmatige intelligentie, ook wel artificiële intelligentie (AI) genoemd.  AI verwijst naar systemen die intelligent gedrag vertonen door hun omgeving te analyseren en – met een zekere mate van zelfstandigheid – actie ondernemen om specifieke doelen te bereiken. Denk aan zelfrijdende auto's of slimme thermostaten. 

Read more

24.10.2019 BE law
Virtual Currency Regulation Law Review - Belgian chapter

Articles - The second edition of the Virtual Currency Regulation Law Review is intended to provide a practical, business-focused analysis of recent legal and regulatory changes and developments, and of their effects, and to look forward at expected trends in the area of virtual currencies on a country-by-country basis.

Read more

Our website uses functional cookies for the functioning of the website and analytic cookies that enable us to generate aggregated visitor data. We also use other cookies, such as third party tracking cookies - please indicate whether you agree to the use of these other cookies:

Privacy – en cookieverklaring