Wednesday, February 12, 2003

Video Surveillance at Work is Contrary to the Canadian Privacy Act In a ruling under the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, the Federal Privacy Commissioner considered the issue of video surveillance of employees at a train yard. The employer argued that the purpose was to reduce vandalism and theft, improve staff security, and limit the potential liability for damages.  The Commissioner found these to be appropriate goals.  However, to ensure compliance with the intent of section 5(3), the Commissioner stressed that the circumstances must also be considered. In determining whether the employer's use of the digital video cameras was reasonable in this case, he considered the following questions: Is the measure demonstrably necessary to meet a specific need? Is it likely to be effective in meeting that need? Is the loss of privacy proportional to the benefit gained? Is there a less privacy-invasive way of achieving the same end? The Commissioner held that the employer had not satisfied him on each of the four questions.  He concluded that the employer's use of surveillance cameras was in contravention of the PIPED. 3:11:42 PM    comment []

Restriction on Internet Posting of Election Results a Reasonable Limit on Freedom of Speech As noted in a previous post, a B.C. Court held that a restriction on publishing election results(which had been done on the Internet) infringed the Charter Right of freedom of speech.  Yesterday, in considering the second part of the test, whether such infringement was reasonable in a free and democratic society, the Court held the limitation to be reasonable.  Canada's election law was upheld.   2:41:17 PM    comment []

© Copyright 2003 Michael Girard.

February 2003
Sun	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat
						1
2	3	4	5	6	7	8
9	10	11	12	13	14	15
16	17	18	19	20	21	22
23	24	25	26	27	28
Jan   Apr