Author: Andrea Monti

Posted on

Criminal Justice System and Personal Data Protection in Japan and Italy – A Special Lecture at Roma Tre University

Special Lecture
(Chair of Criminal Procedure – Prof. Luca Lupària)

 ?Criminal Justice System
and Personal Data Protection
in Japan and Italy

Tuesday 3 September 2019
h 15.00

UNIVERSITÀ DEGLI STUDI ROMA TRE
DIPARTIMENTO DI GIURISPRUDENZA – AULA 5
via Ostiense 159, Roma

 ?Speakers:
Marco Pittiruti (University Roma Tre)
Hiroshi Miyashita (Chuo University of Tokyo)
Andrea Monti (D’Annunzio University of Chieti-Pescara)

N.B. The lectures are in English

Posted on

External Ordre Public and The Limit of GDPR’s Extra-Jurisdictional Reach

It is a well established principle in private international law that

The driving force behind development of ordre public externe is the same as that which motivates public policy: no country can afford to open its tribunals to the legislatures of the world without reserving for its judges the power to reject foreign law that is harmful to the forum. 1

This principle affects directly the power of local EU jurisdictions to impose fines on non-EU countries, notwithstanding what the GDPR says.

Continue reading “External Ordre Public and The Limit of GDPR’s Extra-Jurisdictional Reach”
  1. Kent Murphy, The Traditional View of Public Policy and Ordre Public in Private International Law, 11 Ga. J. Int’l & Comp. L. 591 (1981). ↩
Posted on

Altering Faces. Data Protection And Sore Thumbs

To those that, contrary to any evidence, still believe that data protection equals privacy, this case will come as a shock: the police of Portland (Oregon – USA) ? used Adobe Photoshop to remove tattoos from the picture of a suspect so that he could “blend” better in a photo-based identification. The defense of the suspect claimed that that was a way to “frame” him, while the prosecutor said that the “digital make-up” has been necessary to avoid excessive attention on the face of the suspect itself. The Court still haven’t issue a decision on the matter.

A few issues:

  • Is this a Personal Data Case? Yes. A few things but tattoos identify or make a person identifiable.
  • If happened in the EU, would had it be a GDPR Case? The GDPR doesn’t cover judicial activity and law enforcement investigation. Nonetheless, this is case where the notion of “fair processing” comes into play. Altering reality can hardly be hold as a “fair” behaviour.
  • If not the GDPR, what would have stopped this? This is a case of “reverse fairness” and “investigative malice”. Police wanted to be “fair” toward the suspect and – in the meantime – explore the “possibility” that he disguised the tattoos with a make-up. The due process right prevents (or should prevent) law enforcement from resorting to this trick.

 ?

Posted on

Social Network To Privatize Geopolitical Strategies

According to Forbes, Facebook and Twitter have closed accounts of people linked to the Chinese government and used as anti-propaganda on demonstrations in Hong Kong. The decision came after unspecified “investigations”, at the end of which the two companies decided – in fact – to intervene directly by walking into in a matter of domestic policy of a sovereign state, setting a dangerous precedent. Continue reading “Social Network To Privatize Geopolitical Strategies”

Posted on

A Real-Life Case of Inefficient Profiling

Amazon knows in extreme detail – thanks to the analysis of purchases – my interests and – thanks to the analysis of how I use my Kindle – my reading habits. Yet he sends me an email to suggest, on the basis of my profiling, to buy a book that I wrote.

If all a giant with a limitless computing might like Amazon is able to extract from my personal data is a suggestion to buy my own books either I’m not actually monitored or profiling just doesn’t work.