GOVERNMENT agencies have been authorized to determine whether requests for the personal information of public officials are a matter of public concern, the National Privacy Commission (NPC) said.
In a statement on Tuesday, the NPC said Privacy Commissioner John Henry D. Naga signed NPC Advisory No. 2022-01, which hopes to make information requests conform to privacy norms by subjecting them to tests for transparency, legitimacy of purpose, and proportionality. The person whose information is being requested also has the right to be notified of such requests, and to be informed of action taken.
“The advisory aims to strike a balance between the right of the people to information on matters of public concern and the right to privacy of an individual,” Mr. Naga said.
“Thus, the advisory recognizes the Filipino people’s right to information and the necessity of an open and transparent government, while also giving due consideration and respect to the dignity, safety, and human rights of public officers,” he added.
The NPC said every government agency is responsible for personal data under its control or custody.
Section 7 of the advisory defines the coverage of the guidelines to include public officers and individuals under contract of service.
The section also requires that requests have a clear purpose that is not contrary to law, morals, or public policy.
“When evaluating requests, the government agency shall determine whether the information requested is a matter of public concern and whether there is a public purpose to be served that may outweigh the rights and freedoms of the public officer as a data subject,” the NPC said.
“If the requested document or information is denied and deemed not of public concern, the requestor must be informed within a reasonable time accompanied by a justification,” it added.
The government agency also has the authority to determine whether sensitive personal information is relevant to the purpose of the requesting party.
If deemed irrelevant, the commission said any sensitive personal details can also be redacted.
“Some of these information may include (the) home address of the declarant; details of any unmarried children below 18 years of age living in declarant’s household, if any, particularly their names, dates of birth, and ages; signatures of the declarant and co-declarant; and government-issued ID numbers of the declarant and co-declarant,” the NPC said.
Permitted for disclosure include titles, business address, and office telephone numbers of the data subject; the classification, salary range, and responsibilities of the position held by the subject; and whether the subject is a current or former employee of a government institution.
“Documents (e.g., Personal Data Sheet or PDS, Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth or SALN) that contain sensitive personal information of the concerned public officer, or his or her family, may be granted if there is a declared, specified, and lawful purpose,” the NPC said.
Deputy Privacy Commissioner Leandro Angelo Y. Aguirre said: “We hope that this circular addresses some misconceptions that data privacy and the freedom of information are in conflict with each other. A key mandate of the NPC is to ensure the free flow of information.” — Revin Mikhael D. Ochave
