Personal Data Protection: Interests of the Security Manager

Personal Data Protection
Name
Institution
Instructor
Date
Introduction
Personal data is information which can be used to identify an individual. This information is very necessary and distinct, and companies can access, employers can keep and security systems can demand to have, when needed. This data should be used under some laws which regulate the manner in which it can be shared and given to other parties that might need it. The laws are to ensure that they are used for some concepts of fairness, purpose of use, accuracy and safety (Personal Data Protection Commission Singapore, 2014). Legal information has also to be dealt with to ensure the security of information about ethnic background, religion, and political affiliations. Since its effect, there have been several debates about the same as to whether they stand to obey human rights and protect the same. This article outlines the same concepts of data protection and the extents to which it has reached. There are also occasions in which the security systems might infringe on the rights thereof, use this information for their investigations. Also tackled is the national interest as far as use of personal data is concerned.
There are countries that have set up legislation on data protection by the governments while others have not. America has no centralized system, but several countries in the European continent have created the same (HG.ORG, n. d). These legislations will help the government and even the people whenever their information is used in a manner that shows abuse to them. However, strings will be pulled whether it is the interest of the individual or security apparatus that is put forward (HG.ORG, n. d). In most cases the ultimate security is the goal and that will be the guide.
When personal information is to be used for safety reasons, then it becomes sparse for security agencies to be minimal with their search. They will, under their operating principles, use the information available to ensure their moves are not impeded. The first step is using such information to prevent crime. Information already held by the state or the corporate world will be used to track down people whom they think and are genuinely convinced are violating the security of the people (Rubinstein, Nobein, Lee, 2013). This will be to enforce the security regulations and intelligence investigations whenever a crime is connected to an individual. When this information is accessed in the right manner it should not violate the security of the beholder.
At the point of information being shared between the security chiefs and the individuals themselves is where there are problems of infringement and denials. People would feel the government going too far with their search and the government agency at times feels the people deny them what they should rightfully have, to work. The recent upsurge in terrorist activities has led to the demands by the governments of all the information they can access. How is this achieved? Government requires having information about an individual’s place of residence, contacts, jobs, family and close relatives, religion, education and the background of origin etc. sometimes it is thought the government is trying to curtail civil rights and liberties of the people when they have this information and tracks them down (Michaelson & Christopher, 2006).
To facilitate these balances, several factors are to be considered. First the security agency must inform the person that information about them is might be used when need arises for security regulations. This ensures that their right to privacy is not infringed (Galleta & Hert, n.d). Their consent to it is a go ahead, and the government will be deemed to have worked out in the best practices possible. However, for security uses one must not give a go ahead. It is the security manager that can give the go ahead as to whether the information can be sued or not. The individual, even if they fail to accept the request may fail to protect it if the security agency is to conduct serious operations (Galleta & Hert, n.d). This becomes the legitimate interest of security bodies to use and can rarely be interfered with.
Once this information is in use by the security agency, one has the right to know how they are using the information. However they cannot be given the detailed operations and investigations that have so far yielded some results. They can only be informed that their information can be used for some investigations. If the information is not in compliance with the regulations put in place by a government or breaches the security lineup, then there are chances that it will be confronted in several ways. First, information or data can be subjected to rectification for compliance to be attained (Galleta & Hert, n.d). Some data that can be subject to change or confrontation may include passports, bank accounts and many more.
When both sides are not in agreement on how information can be used, they will have to settle the matter in a formal way. The courts are the best places to listen to such disputes (Galleta & Hert, n.d). The ways to be used include hearing the complaints, investigating for the alleged violations; advise the institutions and individuals on the developments and to keep the subject under the radar over the same. The decisions as decided by a court will remain supreme unless an appeal is made by any of them.
Effectiveness
The effectiveness of the legal process to calculate a balance as to the use of personal data is and must be well evaluated. When the courts prevent the security managers not to use information about an individual it may impede the advancements so far achieved on crime prevention from being realized. This could be harmful to the security investigations if they made several steps towards understanding their real missions. Being a sensitive issue, it can open loopholes and subject the entire security to a state of danger and misuse (Houses of Parliament, n. d).
To the individuals, the judgment may not be fair to them at times. There are times in which information may be allowed for use in ways that will go beyond boundaries and interfere with their rights to privacy. In other circumstances, this may stretch to include family members and even personal investments that are not related to the matter in question. This will be a breach of other peoples' personal information and exposure to wrong use. Furthermore, this information may be shared improperly or without the consent of the person (Strom et al, 2010).
When disputes involving the use of personal information are solved in a biased way it will not be said to be effective. The two parties must be in agreement for the misunderstandings to be amicably handled and an agreement reached. It is this agreement that will render both sides to be operating under the law.
Severe cases will not require the courts to settle. They are the most extreme forms of security operations. When information needed is both urgent and genuinely necessary then the courts will go beyond what is considered too private to accomplish their missions. It can access information about the person, family members, investments, and holdings without their consent . These are the times when the security managers will confess to concentrated solutions or making right decisions. Examples of such situations may include terrorism, kidnappings or serious crimes in security. The afterward steps may include frozen accounts as a measure.
When information about a person is used in such serious investigations then it puts the people under radar all the times. This will remain the undertaking of intelligence services and crime investigators to follow up always. All their transactions will always be monitored, movements recorded and communications kept under surveillance. This is to keep them on track. Sometimes the accomplices and close friends will be under the same for shady deals that might be handled on behalf of these people other than the people themselves. It is at this moment that somebody is said to be on the track of the government.
Times come when personal rights can be overridden and approach given to the use of personal information becomes ridiculous. It happens when there is no cooperation from the individual, or the security forces feel it is the right thing to do. This is the kind of operation that nobody would argue with the security officers about. It involves swift, determined and ruthless data access. It is a time when information may be obtained without one's consent; close friends information may also be accessed and used effectively. At such desperate times, security managers tend to be secretive about their work.
When the security agencies do not obey rights, there are several implications for it. There can be advantages and disadvantages. For national security, there are a lot to be achieved. When the procedure or this infringement backfires, there are disadvantages too. To the individual whose data is accessed will have little to gain in such an operation. At times, this process can spread to organizations too that are associated with such a person.
First, for the entire nation, when information about somebody is accessed and used to forestall any security breach, it will save several people and lives. It is common that security reasons revolve around the lives of people and property that could be damaged. Any plot by people who would want to endanger the lives of others can be tracked and regulations put to ensure it is not achieved. The most common ones of late are the information of people from several parts of the world that have been linked to serious security breach like terrorists. The government and safety departments are allowed by their principles that when information is held and could shed light towards what they need, and then it can have too, and must be obtained.
When the government uses force to access information and to accomplish their mission, it will be a guide to what they can give in the future. A lot of developments have always followed such operations as the demand to get more of personal information (Information Commissioners Office, n. d). Examples can be bank accounts owned by people and family members and friends, contacts be registered with the government and be used to track.
Besides the same government can discover a network of people or a chain of events that can lead to the unearthing of any impending time attack (Federal Bureau of Investigations). It gas always happened to several organizations like FBI and intelligence organizations that they discover in advance and shattered the plans of violators of law and endangers of life (Information Commissioners Office, n. d).
It is not easy to make appeals to such operations, especially when they bear fruits. Even if an appeal is made, they are facts that will be proven to hold the criminally responsible and to justify to the judicial processes that it was the only thing to be done. It is also to be remembered that such operations are always sought after as the last options.
Other than the security to the people the person himself can get some relief when the exercise doe...