Some days ago I had a meeting with Mr. Thomas Hammarberg, Council of Europe (CoE) Commissioner for Human Rights. As Mr. Hammarberg is a person of exceptional interest, an internationally renowned human rights advocate and a well-meaning and highly cultured conversationalist, this meeting, like so many others before it, has been a pleasant one.
However, even a pleasant conversation can bring up some unpleasant facts. Thus, my talks with the CoE Commissioner for Human Rights served as a reminder that a fundamental international document in the field of data protection – Convention 108 on the Protection of Individuals with Regard to Automated Processing of Personal Data – was adopted within the framework of CoE. Sadly, I was also reminded that, although our country can take credit for being one of the “original” parties to this Convention (in the days of FRY), in reality the situation is such that we can hardly claim any credit for the diligence we have demonstrated in complying with the commitments assumed under the Convention.
As an example, one of the key provisions of the Convention, set out in Article 6, is that personal data revealing racial origin, political opinions or religious or other beliefs, as well as personal data concerning health or sexual life, may not be processed automatically unless domestic law provides appropriate safeguards.
Serbian legislation contains a more or less identically worded provision in Article 16 of the Law on Personal Data Protection. But the Law provides for no specific safeguards. Instead, it only stipulates that a Government’s Decree shall be passed to regulate this issue in detail within six months of the date when that Law comes into force. But, even after five consecutive periods of six months, such Decree has not been passed. Thus, the “special” protection of “particularly sensitive” data guaranteed under the Law is apparently not only far from being special, but is in fact non-existent and remains an empty proclamation, a “dead letter”. I do not know if there is a plausible “explanation” for this from the aspect of the barest minimum of compliance with international commitments and, even more importantly, from the aspect of respect of citizens’ rights guaranteed by the law; however, there most certainly is no excuse.
