THE debate about the personal data protection law and the demand for the institution of an independent commission for data protection have come up again when Transparency International Bangladesh and international organisation Article 19 at a joint press conference in Dhaka on April 28 highlighted inadequacy about some definitions in the draft law that warrant attention not to undermine fundamental constitutional rights. When the bill for the data protection law that the government planned to enact into the Data Protection Act 2022 came up for discussion in May that year, it was feared that in all likelihood the law could be a device to establish the government鈥檚 control of individual personal information that could potentially invade citizens鈥� constitutional right to privacy. This so appeared as the draft, which was put online for some time until April 27, 2022 to elicit public opinions, had inadequacy in clear definitions of some terms, ambiguity in some sections that could be issues of debate regarding their interpretation and an absolute power afforded to the authorities as contained in the draft law that could be abused and misused in the absence of any checks and balances on the use of the data thus collected.
Article 19 at the press conference says that the draft law proposes the institution of a data protection board appointed by the government, noting concern that such a board could be biased and unable to hold the government to account. The organisation, therefore, suggests the institution of an independent data protection commission which would be able to foster public trust and ensure an effective enforcement of the law. It also urges the government to unambiguously define what the law would mean by personal data and seeks a timeline for the implementation of the law. Transparency International Bangladesh sounds fears about risks that the government could control personal data. It says that the primary objective of the law is to protect citizens鈥� personal information and the law should clearly define terms such as human rights, the freedom of expression and the protection of personal information, noting that the draft lacks clarity in the definition of person and personal information. The organisation says that any ambiguity in definitions could create scope for the authorities to make arbitrary interpretation or decision about the terms in the absence of clarity. It further says that several government agencies are granted unhindered access to personal information in the name of security and public interests, but the judiciary should have a significant role in all this because an access to personal information could bear risks. Transparency International also holds brief for an independent commission for personal data protection because a board appointed by the government could lead to the conflict of interest as the government is also a user of personal information.
The data protection law should safeguard citizens鈥� privacy and in no way jeopardise civil liberty, but with the inadequacies contained in the draft, it could allow the government to pry into people鈥檚 privacy. While the government must, therefore, sort of the inadequacies, it must also set up an independent commission on personal data protection.
