KUALA LUMPUR (Jan 5): Lawyers for Liberty (LFL) has bit back at Economy Minister Rafizi Ramli’s dismissal of privacy and security concerns of the Central Database Hub (Padu) due to government data being exempted from the Personal Data Protection Act 2010 (PDPA), calling the lawmaker (Rafizi)’s comments “ignorant and irresponsible”.

The human rights and law reform non-governmental organisation said the public’s personal data collected by the government cannot be solely regulated by “ad-hoc and superficial” existing regulations.

“This response by Rafizi is ignorant and irresponsible and is completely oblivious of the role and necessity of PDPA legislation in governing personal data,” LFL director Zaid Malek said in a statement on Friday.

Zaid underlined that personal data collected by the government provided under existing relevant legislation of respective government agencies is ineffective and inadequate, compared to the those afforded by the PDPA.

“The PDPA protects data according to carefully laid out principles including the disclosure principle, the security principle, the retention principle and the data integrity principle,” Zaid said.

“Rafizi must understand that government agencies’ regulations have no such safeguards, thus exposing the public’s personal data to potential abuse and misuse. In fact, [Rafizi] failed to even give one example of any such regulation. Is he speaking of the OSA (Official Secrets Act 1972), which is totally unsuited for this purpose?” Zaid quizzed.

On Thursday, Rafizi called the LFL “silly” for its calls to suspend Padu, pending amendments to the PDPA, noting that existing government regulations already govern the handling and confidentiality of personal data collected by the government.

Zaid also said that Malaysia is behind the global trend in terms of data protection legislation, noting that only Malaysia and Singapore exempt government data from a PDPA legislative regime.

“This is not just an embarrassment to our country, but also affects trade and business with entities from countries which have stricter personal data protection regimes. Surely [Rafizi] should be concerned with this.

“The minister’s refusal to subject government data to PDPA governance is incomprehensible and goes against the global trend,” he added.

Zaid said Rafizi’s claim that there’s a difference between the PDPA and government data reflects a “serious lack of understanding and logic”, as Zaid notes that the nature and value of personal data is the same, irrespective of whether it is used by private businesses or by the government.

Thus, Zaid stressed that it must be equally protected, whether in the hands of the government or the private sector.

“Finally, data protection has become a global concern which cannot simply be brushed aside. There have been a slew of serious criticisms against Padu, apart from the lack of PDPA protection,” he said.

“In the public interest, we strongly reiterate and urge the government to immediately suspend Padu, pending amendment of the PDPA,” he added.

Read also:
Rafizi rubbishes Lawyers for Liberty's claim, says PDPA exemption not an issue for Padu
Launch of Padu before amending PDPA 2010 raises legitimate and serious concerns — Lawyers for Liberty 
PM launches Padu ahead of targeted subsidy implementation