Recently, a large number of citizens, who consider the actions of the representatives of political parties with regard to the election campaign a violation of civil liberties and privacy, have addressed the Commissioner for Information of Public Importance and Personal Data Protection, in different ways. The citizens are particularly concerned about the potential misuse of a variety of personal data, which are usually either processed in databases held by public authorities for purposes stipulated by law or in telephone or internet operators’ databases, which must also be protected, by party activists through the "door to door" campaign, and through electronic communication.
In this regard, the Commissioner recalls that he has been taking measures for personal data protection within the limits of his powers and available resources, on a daily basis. As for this particular cause, regarding electoral activities, the Commissioner recalls that he has warned both the competent authorities and the public, on several occasions, including the last elections, that many citizens perceive various activities of political parties as harassment and an invasion of privacy.
However, it is a notorious fact that the Commissioner does not have any legal or factual ability to prevent anyone from making unsolicited visits to citizens’ homes. Therefore, he has reminded, on several occasions, although this should be superfluous, that citizens do not have any obligation to receive party activists or to respond to their questions, and that this is solely dependent on their willingness to do so.
Bearing in mind that quite a few people have reservations about open opposition against the aspirations of party activists, for various reasons, including fear of reprisal, the Commissioner has repeatedly and publicly stated that this is indicative of the fact that citizens are "protected" from unwanted visits of traders, agents, service providers, at least on paper, in a number of provisions on consumer protection in several laws, however, there are no legal provisions to protect them from similar harassment by party activists. The Commissioner has been warning the public that this issue is worthy of the competent authorities’ attention, and that they would have to assess whether these differences are justified.
As for the suspicions that party activists have been using the official electoral registers, or other personal data that should not be available to them, the Commissioner has also repeatedly emphasized, and shall repeat it this time as well - that unauthorized provision, or communication to another, or use of personal data, which are collected, processed or used in accordance with the law, for purposes other than those for which they are intended constitutes a criminal offense under Article 146 of the Criminal Code; and that a sentence to a term of imprisonment of three years is imposed when it is committed by an officer in discharge of duty, which is the most serious form of this criminal offence.
However, the Commissioner has neither the jurisdiction nor the ability to conduct a criminal investigation. Detection and prosecution of offenders falls within the remit of other state authorities, which exist for this very reason. With regard to this, the Commissioner has repeatedly expressed concerns and dissatisfaction with the failure of these authorities to undertake expected actions, despite a series of reasonable doubts that several such offenses have been committed.
The only legitimate interest is to ensure conditions for a fair electoral competition. This certainly does not exclude, but rather entails compliance with all citizens’ rights, including the right to personal data protection. However, this inevitably requires all state authorities tasked to protect those rights, to take a responsible approach towards their powers and liabilities in this regard.
