The meaning of Personal Data. Comment

I had some difficulties to comment a blog post called "The meaning of personal Data under the Data Protection Act 1988". but, the information I found is quite eye-catching and I would like sharing it with all of you although, it is obviously OUT of the the central topic of my blog.

It is really interesting the article of Helen Hart called ‘Defining Issues’ (1) about the meaning of personal data. The literal concept given by the DPA (Data Protection Act) 1998 s1 (1) and the European Directive (95/46/EC) art2 can be wider than it is believed. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) reinterpreted the meaning of personal data in order to connect it to the present through the guidance Determining what is Personal Data. This document contains a flowchart, where it can be seen what constitutes personal data for the purposes of DPA. However, the guidance does not cover relevant filling system which should be considered.

It is clear that names or addresses can be personal data because these details give information to us about individuals. However, also some daily activities can become personal data depending on the context.(2) Some information is not personal data; however it can be considered as personal data linked to other information. For instance, medical records are not personal data but, if they are used to hire a person they are personal data. Another example, if your bank statements are used for statistical purposes this is not personal data but if they are used to decide if you can personally assume a bank loan those are personal data. Other details, which can actually be personal data can be employment or criminal records, market value of properties…

As a conclusion, it can be established that data has to be considered personal data when that is used to inform or influence actions or decisions affecting an identifiable individual.

(1)H Hart, ‘Defining Issues’ (2007) 157 NLJ 1450

<http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/search/journalssubmitForm.do>

(2)Determining what is Personal Data does state that context is important: ICO, ‘Determining what is Personal Data’ (2007) 6

WTO: INTENTION OR NONSENSE?

            The WTO was born in 1995 from Marrakech Agreement. The basics of the Organization are:[1]

-          Non discrimination treaty is promoted between national and foreign companies.

-          Nations attempt to give similar concessions one another.

-          Negotiations and processes must be fair, opened and must be governed by similar rules.

- The necessity of positive discrimination for developing countries is recognised

The practical application of these basics into the worldwide reality can not avoid debate and reflection. Even in the internal system some imperfections can already be detected. For instance, start of negotiations can be agreed by simple majority if consensus is not achieved (art. IX) and, although 1 person = 1 vote, developed countries take advantage of this situation.[2] This graphical example will be enough to corroborate it: In the Hong Kong summit European delegation was composed by 832 people, EU representation was integrated by 356 people and by 229 for Japan. These details must be compared to representation of Bolivia 7, Rwanda 7, Gambia 2 and Central African Republic which did not have any representative.[3]

On the other hand, it must be considered that WTO has helped developing countries being listened and considered in the worldwide commerce. Now developed countries have to deal with interests of countries which did not have in mind for decisions taking previously. According to WTO data, more than 1500 millions of people have joined global commerce since its birth.[4]

It can be considered that, at least, world powers have now processes which restrain them. However, critics estimate that the aforementioned basics are just a declaration of intentions because it is clear that WTO policies just privilege richest countries.[5]Wordwide trade has tripled but weak countries do not seem to profit by this situation.[6] Actually, WTO regulations can have a deep impact in these economies. Ghana manages short of cash and owns a substantial foreign debt. As a condition of its loans, it has to follow IMF rules for structural adjustment. What this usually means is removing subsidies from local agriculture or industry, opening up its market, welcome to privatization and poverty in the agricultural sector of these countries as an overall consequence because they can not compete against cheaper imports originating from developed countries.[7]

As opposed to this lack of solidarity, it is possible to focus on Peter Sutherland´ speech (GATT and WTO Director-General from1993 to 1995). He advises that WTO “was not created as a development agency”. When he deals with the present African situation, he considers “its failures are not WTO faults.” The problem is that the continent has not been able to participate in globalization, it has not infrastructures, even not formation and education and in addition, its governments are corrupt.[8]

So, who are the great favoured in this “Agreement for the equality”? Developing countries has, at least, a forum which they can demonstrate in and they also enjoy some advantages that were not even thought before.[9]  However, it seems that someone else owns power and money. Is there a failure in the system? Should it be corrected? If that is the case, who wants to correct it…?

---

[1] G Hidayat, ‘WTO and Neoliberalism’ [2008]Dedynhidayat.blogspot.com

[2] M García, ‘ La OMC en el marco de la globalización capitalista’(2001) 3 DERECHOS PARA TODOS 

[3] New Internationalist Magazine, ‘Junk the WTO’(2006) 4(388) New Internationalist Magazine

[4] WTO, ‘Lamy: La expansión del comercio es una garantía contra las turbulencias financieras’[2008]

[5] It must be considered the suspension of the WTO Ministerial Conference in Seattle. One of the reasons was supported by Southern countries, which showed its disaggrement with the fact of not being mostly invited to the "green room" meetings celebrated before the Conference and having to sign a Conference draft which they did not participate in.

[6] UNCTAD, ‘Informe para las inversiones del Mundo. El giro hacia los servicios’ (2004)

[7] n3

[8] Universia-Knowledge@Wharton, ‘La OMC a merced de los países desarrollados’ (2007)

[9] B Ramsey, WTO membership is a trade-off for nations[2008] Seattlepi Business

OMC:¿PROPÓSITO O DESPROPOSITO?

            La OMC nace en 1995 mediante el acuerdo de Marrakech. Los principios de la Organización son los siguientes:[1]

-Se promueve el trato no discriminatorio tanto para empresas estatales como extranjeras.

- Las naciones intentan otorgar similares concesiones las unas a las otras.

- Las negociaciones y los procedimientos deben ser justos, abiertos y deben estar regidos por reglas similares.

- Se reconoce la necesidad de discriminación positiva a los países subdesarrollados.

La aplicación práctica de estos principios en la realidad mundial no escapa al debate y a la reflexión. En el propio sistema interno ya se advierten algunas imperfecciones. Por ejemplo, el inicio de las negociaciones puede ser acordado por mayoría simple a falta de consenso (artículo IX)y aunque 1persona = 1voto, las potencias dominantes resultan favorecidas.[2] Baste este ejemplo gráfico para corroborar lo dicho: En la cumbre de Hong Kong  la delegación de Europa estaba compuesta por 832 personas, la de Estados Unidos por 356 y la de Japón por 229. Comparemos estos datos con la representación de Bolivia 7, Ruanda 7, Gambia 2 o la Republica Centro Africana que no tenía ningún representante.[3]

Por otro lado, debe considerarse que la OMC ha facilitado a países subdesarrollados ser escuchados y considerados en el comercio mundial pues los países desarrollados tienen ahora que estimar los intereses de países que no eran tenidos en cuenta anteriormente para la toma de decisiones. Según datos de la propia OMC más de 1500 millones de personas se han incorporado al comercio mundial desde su nacimiento.[4]

Puede considerarse que al menos las grandes potencias tienen ahora mecanismos que las frenan. Sin embargo los críticos consideran que los principios expuestos son una mera declaración de intenciones al considerar que las políticas de la OMC favorecen solo a los países más ricos.[5]

El comercio mundial se ha triplicado pero no necesariamente a favor de las naciones débiles.[6] De hecho, las normas de la OMC pueden llegar a tener un gran impacto en estas economías. Ghana, por ejemplo, maneja poco dinero en efectivo y tiene una sustanciosa deuda pública. Como condición de sus préstamos debe seguir las reglas de ajuste estructural impuestas por el FMI lo que generalmente significa recorte de subvenciones para la agricultura local o la industria, la apertura de su mercados, la bienvenida a la privatización; y como consecuencia de todo ello la pobreza en el sector agrícola de estos países, que no pueden competir contra importaciones más baratas provenientes de países desarrollados.[7]

En contraposición a esta visión insolidaria encontramos las palabras de Peter Sutherland (Director General del GATT y de la OMC, de 1993 a 1995), quien advierte que la OMC “no fue concebida como una agencia de desarrollo.”Analizando la actual situación de África advierte que “sus fracasos no son culpa de la OMC”. El problema es que el continente no ha sido capaz de participar en la globalización, no tiene infraestructuras, ni formación ni educación y además sus gobiernos son corruptos.[8]

Entonces, ¿Quiénes son los grandes beneficiados de este “acuerdo para la igualdad”? Los países subdesarrollados tienen, al menos, un foro donde poder manifestarse y gozan de algunas ventajas que antes no eran ni siquiera pensadas.[9] Sin embargo, parece que el poder y el dinero siguen siendo de otros. ¿Existe un fallo en el sistema? ¿debe corregirse o no? En caso afirmativo, ¿se quiere corregir…?

---

[1] G Hidayat, ‘WTO and Neoliberalism’[2008]Dedynhidayat.blogspot.com

[2] M García, ‘ La OMC en el marco de la globalización capitalista’(2001) 3 Derechos para todos

[3] New Internationalist Magazine, ‘Junk the WTO’ (2006) 4(388) New Internationalist Magazine

[4] OMC, ‘Lamy: La expansión del comercio es una garantía contra las turbulencias financieras’[2008]

[5] Considérese interesante la suspensión de la Conferencia de la OMC en Seattle por, entre otros motivos, el descontento de los países del Sur al no ser invitados mayoritariamente a las llamadas reuniones de “sala verde” previas a la Conferencia y posteriormente verse condicionados a firmar un borrador de Declaración en la que no habían participado.

[6] UNCTAD, ‘Informe para las inversiones del Mundo. El giro hacia los servicios’(2004) 7

[7] n3

[8] Universia-Knowledge@Wharton, ‘La OMC a merced de los países desarrollados’(2007)

[9] B Ramsey, 'WTO membership is a trade-off for nations'[2008] Seattlepi Business

propósitos de aeioWTO

La Organización Mundial del Comercio se ocupa de las normas que rigen el comercio entre los países, a nivel mundial o casi mundial.[1]

La definición es simple pero el transfondo no lo es tanto. Sus normas y actuaciones son en muchos casos controvertidas, desleales a la realidad o simplemente difíciles de poner en práctica.

El propósito de este espacio será:

-          Analizar críticamente y cuestionar a la OMC en sí

-         Examinar la fundamentación, necesidad y repercusiones de sus actuaciones.

-          Identificar problemas que sus normas han ocasionado u ocasionan en el contexto económico y comercial actual. Considerar su legitimidad y operatividad.

-         Observar problemas de aplicación de las normas de la OMC

A raíz de la exposición de los diferentes temas se busca la reflexión del lector y el posterior debate acerca de los mismos.

A la información podrá accederse tanto en inglés como en español. La intención de esta iniciativa es facilitar el acceso a una información bilingüe que muchas veces es difícil de encontrar para lectores interesados en ella.

Espero que despierte su interés y les sea de utilidad

---

[1] www.wto.org/spanish/thewto_s/whatis_s/tif_s/fact1_s.htm

aeioWTO aims

The World Trade Organization (WTO) deals with the rules of trade between nations at a global or near-global level[1].

The definition is simple but the background is not; WTO rules and actuations are controversial in a lot of cases, unfair to reality or just self-defeating due to the difficulty of putting them into practice.

The proposal of this space will be to:

- Analyse in a critical way and question the WTO itself 

- Examine the basis, necessity and repercussions of its acts

- Identify problems that its rules cause or have caused, in the present economic and commercial context

- Observe application problems of WTO rules

The presentations of the different topics are seeking the readers´ reflection and a later debate about them.

The information will be posted both in English and Spanish. The intention of this initiative is to make finding and accessing bilingual information easier, for this is often a difficult task for those who are interested

I hope it stirs your interest and will be useful to all of you.

---

[1] www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/fact1_e.htm