Article 87 GDPR: Difference between revisions

From GDPRhub
Line 189: Line 189:
== Commentary ==
== Commentary ==


National identification numbers (NIN) as understood in Article 87 GDPR are used as a unique and trustworthy method of identifying a particular person by state authorities, so that public services might be provided to that person while also respecting their privacy.<ref>Van Eecke/Simkus, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 87 GDPR, p. 1226 (Oxford University Press 2020).</ref> Member States can choose whether they want to adopt a system of multiple numbers which could be used either by all state authorities for any public administration purpose, or could be used only for a specific sector or purpose.  
National identification numbers (NIN) as understood in Article 87 GDPR are used as a unique and trustworthy method by state authorities for identifying a particular person, so that public services might be provided to that person while also respecting their right to privacy.<ref>Van Eecke/Simkus, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 87 GDPR, p. 1226 (Oxford University Press 2020).</ref> Member States can choose whether they want to adopt a system of multiple numbers which could be used either by all state authorities for any public administration purpose, or only by specific authorities for limited purposes.  


Since there are no specific rules for NIN, it is up to each Member State to determine the conditions under which the national ID numbers can be processed. The sensitivity of the issue, which is linked to the sensitive issue of state sovereignty as well as the complexity of the topic, lead the EU legislator not to fully harmonize these rules. The NIN is therefore not ''ibso facto'' characterized as sensitive data in the sense of [[Article 9 GDPR]]. As the state has the possibility to self-define the processes for data processing in this case, it has also the possibility to decide upon the characterization of these data as sensitive. This was also the rationale behind the precursor to Article 87 GDPR, Article 8(7) of the DPD.  
The complexity and sensitivity of the issue, which is linked to that of state sovereignty, has led the EU legislator not to fully harmonize these rules under the GDPR. Since there are no specific rules in this respect at the EU level, it is up to each Member State to determine the conditions under which these NIN can be processed in compliance with the GDPR. The NIN is for example not ''ibso facto'' characterized as sensitive data in the sense of [[Article 9 GDPR]]. Yet, each Member State has the possibility to characterize NIN as sensitive personal data at the national level, and to impose additional conditions for controllers or processors that need or want to process NIN. This was already the case under Article 8(7) of the DPD, i.e. the precursor of Article 87 GDPR.  


The Article provides that member states may choose to adopt measures on processing the national ID numbers. If the member state decides to adopt measures, then it also has to implement the appropriate safeguards to secure the protection of the citizens’ data.<ref>Van Eecke/Simkus, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 87 GDPR, p. 1224 (Oxford University Press 2020).</ref>   
Article 87 GDPR further provides that if a member state decides to adopt specific measures regarding the processing of NON, it also has to implement appropriate safeguards to ensure the protection of the rights and freedoms of citizens.<ref>Van Eecke/Simkus, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 87 GDPR, p. 1224 (Oxford University Press 2020).</ref> Article 87 GDPR does not specific which additional safeguards should be implemented, leaving once again full discretion to Member States in this respect.  


According to these the member states around Europe have adopted a different strategy to face this issue. They are mentioned indicatively, Belgium or Sweden which follow a system of general application as it was indicated by article 8(7) DPD and Austria or Portugal which haven’t opted for a general application but they are limiting the use within one public sector.<ref>Van Eecke/Simkus, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 87 GDPR, p. 1225 (Oxford University Press 2020).</ref>   
In line with this provision, Member States around the EU have adopted different strategies. Belgium or Sweden, for example, have been following a system of general application, as already permitted under Article 8(7) DPD. By contrast, Austria or Portugal for example have adopted more specific rules regarding the processing of NIN by limiting its use by or within the public sector.<ref>Van Eecke/Simkus, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 87 GDPR, p. 1225 (Oxford University Press 2020).</ref>   


== References ==
== References ==

Revision as of 12:51, 29 November 2021

Article 87 - Processing of the national identification number
Gdpricon.png
Chapter 10: Delegated and implementing acts

Legal Text


Article 87 - Processing of the national identification number

Member States may further determine the specific conditions for the processing of a national identification number or any other identifier of general application. In that case the national identification number or any other identifier of general application shall be used only under appropriate safeguards for the rights and freedoms of the data subject pursuant to this Regulation.

Commentary

National identification numbers (NIN) as understood in Article 87 GDPR are used as a unique and trustworthy method by state authorities for identifying a particular person, so that public services might be provided to that person while also respecting their right to privacy.[1] Member States can choose whether they want to adopt a system of multiple numbers which could be used either by all state authorities for any public administration purpose, or only by specific authorities for limited purposes.

The complexity and sensitivity of the issue, which is linked to that of state sovereignty, has led the EU legislator not to fully harmonize these rules under the GDPR. Since there are no specific rules in this respect at the EU level, it is up to each Member State to determine the conditions under which these NIN can be processed in compliance with the GDPR. The NIN is for example not ibso facto characterized as sensitive data in the sense of Article 9 GDPR. Yet, each Member State has the possibility to characterize NIN as sensitive personal data at the national level, and to impose additional conditions for controllers or processors that need or want to process NIN. This was already the case under Article 8(7) of the DPD, i.e. the precursor of Article 87 GDPR.

Article 87 GDPR further provides that if a member state decides to adopt specific measures regarding the processing of NON, it also has to implement appropriate safeguards to ensure the protection of the rights and freedoms of citizens.[2] Article 87 GDPR does not specific which additional safeguards should be implemented, leaving once again full discretion to Member States in this respect.

In line with this provision, Member States around the EU have adopted different strategies. Belgium or Sweden, for example, have been following a system of general application, as already permitted under Article 8(7) DPD. By contrast, Austria or Portugal for example have adopted more specific rules regarding the processing of NIN by limiting its use by or within the public sector.[3]

References

  1. Van Eecke/Simkus, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 87 GDPR, p. 1226 (Oxford University Press 2020).
  2. Van Eecke/Simkus, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 87 GDPR, p. 1224 (Oxford University Press 2020).
  3. Van Eecke/Simkus, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 87 GDPR, p. 1225 (Oxford University Press 2020).